Image 01 Image 03

Immigration Tag

In a show of defiance against the European Union, Poland's newly-elected conservative Prime Minister Beata Szydlo has broken with the practice of her liberal predecessors and decided to remove the EU flag from her weekly news conference. Last month, Prime Minister Szydlo's conservative Law and Justice Party won a landslide victory on an anti-immigration and Eurosceptic platform. The new Polish government is opposed to the EU-backed German proposal to distribute migrants across EU member states. Poland is only willing to accept displaced Christians from the Middle East.

Wednesday, I argued that debate over the Syrian refugee crisis detracts from the heart of the issue -- President Obama’s incompetency combatting radical Muslim terrorist cells. Had this administration some semblance of strategy or will to win, the contentious and overly politicized refugee debate would be nonexistent. There would be no need for for the masses to flee heinously violent Islamist terrorists.
The better discussion here is not refugees that will take at least 18 months to vet, but how an absence of overall strategy has resulted in an emboldened ISIS. Speaking from Turkey earlier this week, President Obama renewed his commitment to stay the course with the current strategy to fight ISIS (whatever that is) and admitted he has no interest in, “pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning,” an attitude that become more obvious by the day.
Prior to Thursday's House vote to halt President Obama's Syrian refugee proposal, Rep. Trey Gowdy also argued that, "the people in charge of our foreign policy seem more interested in treating the symptoms," rather than addressing why thousands are fleeing their homeland.

Wednesday, Bloomberg released a poll that captured national attitudes on America's commitment to take in 10,000 Syrian refugees. In the wake of Friday's Paris attacks, 53% of Americans polled opposed continuation of plans to assist in the resettling of Syrian nationals seeking refugee status. According to Bloomberg, "Just 28 percent would keep the program with the screening process as it now exists, while 11 percent said they would favor a limited program to accept only Syrian Christians while excluding Muslims, a proposal Obama has dismissed as “shameful” and un-American." Mirroring the sentiments found in the Bloomberg poll, a bevy of Republican governors also indicated unwillingness to accept a portion of Syrian refugees. As we discussed earlier this week, while Governors do not have legal authority to determine what individuals gain entrance into the United States, they can complicate the resettlement process by refusing to cooperate with federal authorities. Also at question is the vetting process. As with all visa or immigrant petitions issued by the federal government, the vetting process takes awhile. Applicants are run through FBI background checks, health screens, interviews, and other scrutiny before receiving an opportunity to request entry to the United States. For those seeking refugee status, the wait time clocks in at about 18 months. Caps are set on the number of refugees to be admitted by region. Similar caps apply to other visa types. According to the Department of State, 70,000 individuals were admitted under refugee status in 2013, only 36 of which were Syrian nationals. In 2012, only 31 of 76,000 refugees were Syrian. So why all the fuss now?

We recently reported that San Francisco’s “sanctuary sheriff” lost his re-election bid, defeated in large part because of the release of an illegal immigrant accused of killing Kate Steinle while she walking on the city waterfront with her father. This defeat has helped fuel the launch of an initiative so that California voters can eliminate sanctuary cities in this state:
A California group has launched a ballot initiative to eliminate sanctuary cities, hoping to take power away from state and local lawmakers who have banned their police and sheriff’s deputies from cooperating with federal deportation authorities. “This should be a warning sign to elected officials in other sanctuary cities that the majority are opposed to their refusing to cooperate with federal authorities,” said Ted Hilton, the man behind the new ballot initiative. ...Mr. Hilton’s ballot initiative would effectively overturn the Trust Act, requiring police to notify federal authorities every time they encounter an illegal immigrant. Federal agents could still refuse to deport them, but the state would have done its part. State and local authorities would also be required to comply with federal agents’ requests to be notified when an immigrant wanted by ICE is to be released, and to honor “detainer” requests asking that immigrants be held for pickup.

As the Republican presidential primary heats up, illegal immigration is again taking center stage.  While this is nothing new (as we know President Reagan attempted to address it in the '80s, John McCain made it a priority in '08, and on), the discussion has taken an interesting turn this election cycle. At issue, of course, are Obama's executive amnesty, the recent influx of illegal immigrants (including huge numbers of children), the vast number of illegals currently living and working in the U.S., border security (such as it is), and a host of related issues including the burden of illegal immigration on tax payers in terms of jobs, health care, schooling, police and judicial involvement, and various entitlement costs. Marco Rubio's involvement with the Gang of Eight, particularly his decision to work closely with Chuck Schumer, has not gone unnoticed by either the conservative base nor by the other presidential hopefuls.

Struggling under a record 181,000 migrants arriving into Germany just in October, many are calling for a limit to the highest refugee flow into Europe since World War ll. Traveling recently from Amsterdam through Germany and Austria, into Budapest, Hungary, I witnessed the mass migration in Germany in several towns. I spoke to residents, shopkeepers, tour guides, restaurateurs, and bar keepers about the immigrants in several towns I traveled. In every discussion, they expressed concern, dismay, and fear at what will happen to their country with the inflow of Muslim migrants.  In some German towns, police recommend separating Christian and Muslim immigrants. Fights regularly break out involving hundreds of immigrants at a time in the housing facilities. There are reports in German newspapers that police are overwhelmed. Most expressed frustration and a disconnect with their politicians, who claim Germany can handle the immigrants. The German people aren’t so sure about the flow of so many new foreign arrivals from such a different culture, and say their country lacks the ability to accommodate them.

British Prime Minister David Cameron has laid out new conditions for his country to remain in the European Union. Ahead of the historic EU referendum scheduled to take place in 2017, Prime Minister is trying to renegotiate UK's relationship with EU. If the bid fails, it may eventually lead to British exit from the European Union or Brexit. European Commission reacted promptly to British Prime Minister's new demands calling some of them "highly problematic." The New York Times reports:

At a time when a growing number of Americans are becoming more concerned about illegal immigration and border security, wouldn't it make perfect sense for the government to put a sanctuary city advocate in charge of our border? When we told them we we care about jobs and the economy, they gave us Obamacare. When we expressed concern about terrorism, they told us climate change was a bigger threat. Naturally, our concerns about immigration warrant a border chief who doesn't believe in enforcing immigration law. William La Jeunesse of FOX News provides this stunning report:
Sources: Vocal supporter of sanctuary cities on short list to be next head of Border Patrol A former San Francisco police chief and vocal supporter of a sanctuary cities policy is on a short list of candidates to become the new chief of the Border Patrol, according to sources.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals just issued an opinion (full embed at bottom of post) upholding a lower court preliminary injunction against Obama's unilateral immigration executive order. The Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (“DAPA”) program expanded a previous effort, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ("DACA") by the Obama administration to protect from deportation illegal immigrants who were brought here as minor children, often referred to as "DREAMers." Under DAPA, parents who were here illegally but whose children were American citizens or lawful permanent residents could also apply for protection from deportation. Obama also expanded the rules for DACA, making even more illegal immigrants eligible to avoid deportation. DAPA drew a lawsuit very shortly after Obama signed the order last fall. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R), who was at that time serving as the state's Attorney General, led a twenty-six state coalition that opposed DAPA and they successfully argued for a preliminary injunction to be issued by a Texas federal court to prevent DAPA from being implemented. The federal government appealed that order to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, but their efforts would once again fail, as the Court, in a 2-1 decision, ruled that the injunction should remain in place.

Last summer, a young woman named Kate Steinle was murdered by an illegal immigrant named Francisco Sanchez. Sanchez had been previously detained and then released by San Francisco authorities under the city's "sanctuary" laws. After Sanchez's act of brutality hit the headlines, activists and conservatives in Congress sprang into action, drafting "Kate's Law," which would block cities that refuse to abide by federal immigration policies from receiving federal law enforcement funding. Democrats blocked passage of the bill in the Senate, but the fight rages on, and for good reason. Pro-illegal immigration activists are terrified of it. The MSM and White House did an excellent job keeping the administration's inaction on the issue out of the press, but that hasn't stopped the good guys from fighting back. Media Research Center reporter Dan Joseph took his team to a pro-amnesty rally in Boulder, Colorado, and started asking attendees if they had heard of Kate, or her namesake law. You can see what happened in the video below. At about the 1:38 mark, MRC finally finds a rally attendee who has at least heard of Kate's Law and is willing to say that illegal immigrants who commit violent crimes should not be allowed to remain the country. (Never fear---ten seconds later two women come together to blame the human condition for brutal murders, as opposed to the people who commit them.)

"For the children" unless using children as profane props helps your cause, in which case, eff it. Or at least that seems to be the case with a presumably anti-Trump PAC, Deport Racism. Promoting their contest which offers a cash prize to any audience member who successfully disrupts Trump's upcoming Saturday Night Live appearance by shouting "deport racism" or calling Trump a racist, Deport Racism used children to share, a "few words of their own" with The Donald. Mainly, "f*ck you, racist F*ck!" WARNING: Language, obvs.

Kate Steinle's murder by an illegal immigrant with a violent criminal past and several deportations under his belt resulted in public outcry against sanctuary cities.  While the left-leaning media worked overtime trying to show there is no link between violent crime and illegal immigration (one even going so far as to argue that illegal immigration decreases crime rates), the state legislature in North Carolina decided to take action. North Carolina governor Pat McCrory has signed a bill into law that effectively bans sanctuary cities in his state. The Washington Examiner reports:
North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory signed a bill into law Wednesday that bans any policy that interferes with the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The Protect N.C. Workers Act, HB 318, reins in local and municipal policies that disregarded federal law by providing sanctuary or "safe" cities, and public benefits like food stamps, for individuals illegally in the U.S.

The small German village of Sumte has approximately 100 local residents but is now slated to receive 750 refugees from Syria and other countries. How is this supposed to work? If you lived in a one bedroom apartment, would you volunteer to take in seven permanent house guests? Andrew Higgins reports at the New York Times:
German Village of 102 Braces for 750 Asylum Seekers SUMTE, Germany — This bucolic, one-street settlement of handsome redbrick farmhouses may for the moment have many more cows than people, but next week it will become one of the fastest growing places in Europe. Not that anyone in Sumte is very excited about it. In early October, the district government informed Sumte’s mayor, Christian Fabel, by email that his village of 102 people just over the border in what was once Communist East Germany would take in 1,000 asylum seekers.

The landslide victory of the conservative party in Poland has delivered a big blow to the open border policy pursued by German Chancellor Merkel and unelected Eurocrats in Brussels. Poland’s ruling liberal Civic Platform has now become the first political victim of EU’s mass migration policy. The conservative Law and Justice Party won most of the seats in the Polish parliament, securing about 38 percent of the votes. If the initial figures are confirmed, it will be the first time in democratic Poland’s history that a single party has secured a majority in the country’s parliament. 52-year-old miner’s daughter, Beata Szydło (Law and Justice Party) is expected to replace the incumbent Prime Minister Ewa Kopacz, who belongs to the Civic Platform party. With Prime Minister Kopacz’s devastating defeat, Chancellor Merkel has lost her most important ally in Eastern Europe. Hungary's President Victor Orban is already leading an open charge in Eastern Europe against Markel’s pro-immigration policy.

Some of the most influential Latino minds in the conservative movement, including Alfonso Aguilar, Director of American Principles Project’s Latino Partnership, representatives from the LIBRE Initiative, Mario H. Lopez, president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund, Rosario Marin, former U.S. treasurer, Massey Villareal, the former chairman of the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and many more are meeting on the eve of the CNBC GOP Presidential debate. During the closed-door meeting, leading Conservative Latino activists will discuss the immigration proposals and public statements of each of the presidential candidates and identify any candidates who may not earn the support of the Latino community. Following the meeting, attendees will hold a press conference. Anger over immigration comments made by Republican presidential candidates Donald Trump and the seeming endorsement of such comments by Senator Ted Cruz compelled Conservative Latino activists to form a coalition.

Last week, Democrats blocked the passage of Kate's Law, a measure which would punish illegal immigrants who repeatedly re-enter the country after deportation. Bill O'Reilly of FOX News has been one of the most vocal proponents of the law and spoke to FOX and Friends about what happened in Congress. The FOX News Insider reports:
O'Reilly to Dems Against Kate's Law: 'How Can You Live with Yourself?' Bill O'Reilly said a stand-alone vote on Kate's Law would put lawmakers to the test and -- in his opinion -- disqualify any Democratic senators who oppose it from holding office. The proposal would impose a mandatory five-year prison sentence on felons caught trying to re-enter the U.S. after being deported.

With news reports in Germany putting the number of migrants expected at 1.5 million, the opposition to Chancellor Angela Merkel's open boarder policy is rising. On Monday, about nine thousand people took to streets in Dresden at a rally called by the anti-Islamization group PEGIDA, or the Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West. The Federal and local governments are clueless on how to handle the uncontrolled influx of migrants into Germany. Some municipalities, like the City of Hamburg, want to confiscate private property to house new migrants.

Governments across Europe are complying with European Union directives to accommodate tens of thousands of migrants arriving each day. Germany, which became the driving force behind the recent influx of migrants after it suspended Dublin convention, refuses to put any cap to the number of migrants it can absorb. The rules of law and property rights are the first casualties of the EU push for a more 'generous' migration policy. Countries like Germany and Sweden are considering revising existing property laws to confiscate homes to house arriving migrants. Austria has changed its constitution to force provinces to accept higher quotas of migrants. The existing law restricted the intake of refugees more than 1.5 percent of the population. The country is expecting to receive about 80,000 asylum claims by the end of 2015. The Austrian news website The Local reports:
The move, mirroring EU efforts to oblige member states to accept more migrants, is aimed at relieving Austria's overcrowded main refugee centre at Traiskirchen, and comes into effect on October 1. It was put forward by Chancellor Werner Faymann's Social Democrats and the centre-right People's Party, which form Austria's governing coalition, and votes from the Greens gave it the necessary two-thirds majority.  (...) In recent months Austria has become a major transit country for tens of thousands of migrants entering from Hungary -- having travelled up the western Balkans -- bound for northern Europe, in particular Germany.