×

Trump is within his rights with immigration policy

To the editor:

I have been pondering the recent case of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court taking over alien entry policy from the president of the United States. It was also interesting that the law in question which gives the president his authority was reportedly never looked at, or at least was never mentioned in their written opinion, by the justices.

Perhaps to make this clearer to the reader, I should quote the law that gives the president the authority. It is U.S. Code Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part II, Section 1182, Paragraph (f), Suspension of Entry. It reads in part:

“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

So now that you have read the text, you can see it is quite clear as to what the president can do. Suspension of entry has been done by most of President Trump’s predecessors including Obama when he suspended entry of Iraqis in 2011. Nothing was ever questioned before. I guess the protestors were saving their indignation for President Trump’s order.

Let us examine the seven countries on his list. They are Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Yemen, Sudan and Syria. Six of those countries are failed nations and their central government, if there is one, controls only a small area of their nation. They are nations with internal civil wars going on causing massive upheaval. The only one with a functioning government is Iran.

Iran likes to have large demonstrations of thousands of their people marching in the streets shouting, “Death to America!” and they call the U.S. the “great Satan.” In Iran’s case, they would love to get some terrorists into our country. So, when you are attempting to vet anyone from those seven nations, just who do you contact to do the background check? In addition, the ban is not absolute, waivers are being granted when possible.

Some have said that no Americans have been attacked by anyone from those seven nations in the U.S. Nothing could be further from the truth. Here are just two examples of terrorist acts:

On Sept. 17, 2016, Dahir Ahmed Adan, born in Somalia, entered a mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota, dressed as a security guard and began stabbing individuals before an off-duty cop shot and killed him. According to police, Adan asked at least one person if they were a Muslim before attacking them and made statements regarding Allah during the attack. Ten were injured in the stabbing spree, but thankfully none were killed or suffered grave injuries.

On Nov. 28, 2016, Somali refugee Abdul Razak Ali Artan attacked 11 Americans with a car and then a knife on the campus of Ohio State University in Columbus before a campus police officer shot and killed him.

Now my questions are: If there is no central government that can honestly vet the people from those nations, but waivers can be granted when appropriate, just what is the problem? Are you willing to risk your life and the lives of your family to have no control over who enters the U.S.? Is allowing foreigners from war-torn countries where they cannot be vetted unfettered entry to the U.S. that important to you?

There have been discussions in Congress about creating a 12th Circuit Court to take some of the workload and territory of the 9th Circuit Court, which has jurisdiction over 20 percent of the population and is overloaded with cases. This will hasten that action and President Trump will be the one to appoint the justices. Let us just hope no Americans will lose their lives over this improper ruling that will not stand under scrutiny by the Supreme Court.

In conclusion, I know liberals are celebrating a victory here concerning President Trump, but is it really a victory? I can guarantee that Democrat politicians are sweating the court’s ruling.

If there is any attack from someone from those seven nations who entered during this time frame, they will pay at the polls in 2018 because it can be rightly claimed that Democrats were more interested in importing foreign terrorists than protecting American citizens.

Actually, this ruling has most certainly hurt the liberal side in the next election, count on it. The invasion over our southern border is a big reason President Trump was elected and the ruling only worsens the correct perception that the Democrats do not take terrorism seriously.

David Adams

Milroy

NEWSLETTER

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

COMMENTS

Starting at $3.92/week.

Subscribe Today