Opening the Floodgates to Illegal Immigration

An analysis from the distinguished jurist Judge John H. Wilson, (ret.)

The Biden Administration has wasted no time in declaring our borders open to illegal aliens. One of the 46^th president’s first acts was an Executive Order “on the Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities.” This Order specifically revokes President Trump’s 2017 Executive Order 13768, which states that “Sanctuary jurisdictions across the United States willfully violate Federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States. These jurisdictions have caused immeasurable harm to the American people and to the very fabric of our Republic.” Gone now is Executive Order 13768’s directive to “(e)nsure(d) that jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable Federal law do not receive Federal funds.”

As reported in the Texas Tribune, based upon this “Revision of Priorities” Order, “(t)he Department of Homeland Security announced two significant immigration policy changes…a 100-day pause on deportations for some undocumented immigrants (and) asylum seekers who attempt to enter the United States will no longer be part of a controversial policy enacted under former President Donald Trump that has forced tens of thousands to wait in Mexico for American court hearings.”

Further, by Proclamation, Biden has declared “the Termination of Emergency with Respect to the Southern Border of the United States and Redirection of Funds Diverted to Border Wall Construction.” In the words of this Proclamation, “building a massive wall that spans the entire southern border is not a serious policy solution. It is a waste of money that diverts attention from genuine threats to our homeland security…I have determined that the declaration of a national emergency at our southern border in Proclamation 9844 of February 15, 2019…was unwarranted. It shall be the policy of my Administration that no more American taxpayer dollars be diverted to construct a border wall.”

In response to these changes, a large caravan of Hondurans attempted to push their way through Guatemala on their way to Mexico, and eventually, the Southern US border. As one member of the caravan stated, “Now that the new president (Biden) is here we are waiting for the answer, all of us immigrants who are here from Honduras…We are looking to see what the new president says to move forward.” However, as reported by AP, the “once large caravan of Honduran migrants that pushed its way into Guatemala last week had dissipated by Tuesday in the face of Guatemalan security forces. Small groups pressed on toward the Mexican border, while others accepted rides from authorities back to Honduras.”

Nevertheless, how long will the Mexicans and Guatemalans hold back Hondurans from traveling through their countries? Those applying for asylum no longer need to wait in Mexico for their application to be heard, those in the United States illegally won’t be deported, and sanctuary cities will not lose federal funding for harboring illegal aliens. Sounds like the “coyotes” and other people smugglers are back in business.

Ronald Tamler , a commander levitra medical expert working for the Mount Sinai Clinical Diabetes Institute in New York for guidance and help in fighting anti-aging. It offers effective treatment for mental, physical and sexual health http://www.unica-web.com/watch/2010/marivanna.html cialis uk and wellbeing. Also many online drug stores provide you with find out this web-site samples of generic viagras. You shall ask all manner of questions that you need not have buy tadalafil online to hurry up with your happy hours.

Maybe you think these changes are the worst we can expect from the Biden Administration on the issue of illegal immigration. If so, you’d be wrong. A more significant change, with far-reaching effects has also been instituted by President Biden.

As described by James DeLong in the Federalist, “(t)he Enumeration Clause, as modified by the 14th Amendment, says representatives are apportioned among the states ‘according to their respective numbers,’ as determined by ‘counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.’ The clause goes on to require a decennial enumeration—we know this as the census.”

Zachary Mueller of America’s Voice describes the importance of the census; “The number of U.S. House seats was capped at 435 total seats in 1929, and each House district contains roughly the same number of people, which means that states can lose or gain House seats depending on how their population has changed since the last census. Currently, each House member represents about 747,000 people as there (are) about 327 million people in the U.S. The upcoming 2020 census will determine which states will lose seats and which will gain seats.”

The Report Concludes Tomorrow

Illustration: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.