Tag: immigration policy

NYC Allows Non-Citizens to Vote


What Liberals consider immigration reform is an absolute disgrace. Not only does the left want open borders, they want the streams of non-citizens to vote. From Fox News:

The New York City Council on Thursday approved a measure to allow the nearly 800,000 legal non-citizens in the metropolis to vote in municipal elections.


The Center for Immigration has been following the polling of the immigration issue closely since the election of President Biden. The 2020 presidential campaign was largely devoid of any debate on immigration policy, meaning that very few Americans voted for Joe Biden because of his immigration positions. But polling shows that there has been consistent, and growing, opposition to the Biden administration’s immigration policies and actions. Will public opinion eventually force a change in current immigration policies, and how might Biden’s immigration policies influence the next election?

On this week’s episode of Parsing Immigration Policy, Andrew Arthur, the Center’s resident fellow in law and policy, discusses immigration polls and their influence on the Biden administration’s policies. Arthur said, “Polling shows that Biden’s immigration policies are plainly unpopular with a large swath of the electorate. We have seen the public’s response to the monthly apprehension numbers at the border and Biden’s push for an amnesty, and we certainly saw a public reaction to the images of large numbers of migrants crossing the Rio Grande and the encampments in Del Rio, Texas. Immigration has jumped in importance to the public, but whether it remains a key issue will depend on how bad the border disaster becomes.”

This week on JobMakers, Host Denzil Mohammed talks with Jim Stergios, executive director of Pioneer Institute, about why Pioneer collaborated with The Immigrant Learning Center to produce this podcast. They discuss the overrepresentation of immigrants in terms of job creation in America, contrary to the myth that immigrants “take” jobs. For Jim, it is a story that needs to be told because it is at the core of American enterprise, innovation and prosperity; but it is also personal. He describes his own family’s history of starting a business as young immigrants to the U.S. from Greece, and connects it to the common story of America, a nation of immigrant families old and new. And Jim believes the entrepreneurial spirit of yesteryear is the same among today’s immigrants, as you’ll learn in this week’s JobMakers.



Much academic work has been published on U.S. employer preference for hiring foreign low-skill labor over American workers, particularly black American workers. In this week’s episode of Parsing Immigration Policy, Amy Wax, the Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, highlights reasons why employers might seek to hire foreign nationals and the implications for American workers and society. Wax and Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and host of the podcast, explore the impact of the government permitting a constant flow of low-skill immigration, especially the harm done to low-skill American workers, who are less able to develop skills or support a family and may drop out of the workforce all together.

What would be the long-term implications for our country if immigration of unskilled foreign workers were reduced and policies putting Americans back to work were prioritized?

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, kicks off a new podcast with a conversation about the immigration policy changes enacted by President Biden during his first 100 days in office. Krikorian and his guest, a former Chief of the Office of Policy and Strategy at USCIS, discuss the southern border, interior enforcement, welfare, and the travel ban. What a difference 100 days make!

Related Article: President Biden’s First 100 Days: Swift Action to Change Immigration Policy

Member Post


The Trump administration’s new guidelines under the Department of Homeland Security are not allowing foreign students to continue their studies on line while remaining in the U.S. The new guidelines are apparently requiring foreign students to return to the classroom or face deportation and continue on line studies from their country of origin. This is […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Immigrant Tales


Consider two tales of African immigrants in America. One tale is of large populations crammed down local communities, possibly with massive fraud and likely with domestic political intent. The second tale is of worthy individuals, invited for their excellence and gratefully contributing to this country.

Pretending the first does not exist is an insult to the injured Americans, whose local economies and electoral power were quite deliberately infringed upon. Pretending the second does not exist is an insult to our founding ethos, to our Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

The Somalis in Minnesota:

The 411 on the Latest National Emergency


President Trump’s declaration, on 15 February 2019, of a “national emergency,” is quite ordinary, the latest in a long line of such declarations going back to President Carter. Far from creating some dangerous precedent, it only reinforces our constitutional order. While it will certainly be challenged in federal court, this may actually be the opportunity to set Article III courts back on their proper path, ending bad behavior by the lowest level, federal district judges.

The Ricochet editors desk posted the entire text of the declaration in Trump Declares National Emergency at the Southern Border. The text is quoted from the White House page, Presidential Proclamation on Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States. C-SPAN has the video and transcript of President Trump’s remarks, followed by some hostile questions on the lawn.

In his remarks beforehand, President Trump repeatedly invoked Angel Moms and had them stand with the photograph of their dead loved one. These women, seated in the front row, turned and put the inconvenient truth into the face of the media who have pointedly ignored their loss. Do watch the video.

The “411” on “National Emergency”


Sadly, supposedly expert, professional commentators have continued the lazy practice of bloviating rather than elucidating. Let’s circle back around and lay out the law on “national emergencies.” It is right there for anyone who can read to read, without any special permissions: 50 U.S. Code Subchapter II – DECLARATIONS OF FUTURE NATIONAL EMERGENCIES. Let’s all do a bit of reading together, and then I invite members with relevant legal experience to comment on any relevant case law.

Consider the following law. Think very carefully through the very first sentence. As with some many other areas, where Congress feels a need to “do something” but doesn’t know how to specify, to clearly limit, the usual result is a vague grant of authority to the Executive branch.

Declare National Border Emergency, Kill Two Birds with One Stone



Talk of President Trump building the border wall under a declaration of national emergency seemed fanciful, unanchored in law. While major media including Fox News have done no more than wave the term around, a lawyer and talk show host for Urban Family Talk actually laid out the law. There is a case for building under a national emergency, and if the President takes this route, there is also an opportunity to force the federal judiciary back under the Constitution.

The case for “wall” construction under national emergency powers:

Member Post


I enjoy PowerLine. Great stuff without crazy spin. This posting on immigration ticked me off, and not because of anything John Hinderaker wrote. It featured a think tank paper claiming low-skilled immigration boosts votes for Republicans. The .org website blocks downloads by American taxpayers, but is free to federal bureaucrats, journalists, academics, and foreigners subsidized by […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Recorded on September 28, 2017
As Congress and the White House wrestle over immigration reform—funding for a border wall, protecting Dreamers—what is the public’s attitude? Timothy Kane, the Hoover Institution’s J. P Conte Fellow in Immigration Studies, highlights the findings of a new Hoover/YouGov survey on immigration and which policy ideas enjoy consensus approval.