Opinion Trump’s ‘public charge’ immigration welfare rule was foolish to begin with
In 5-4 ruling, Supreme Court allows Trump plan to deny green cards to those who might need gov't aid
DHS said last year that it would expand the definition of "public charge," to be applied to people whose immigration to the U.S. could be denied because of a concern that they would primarily depend on the government.The court acted on a vote of 5-4. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan said they would have left a lower court ruling in place that blocked enforcement while a legal challenge works its way through the courts.
Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.
The Supreme Court ignited a firestorm on Monday when it upheld a controversial Trump administration immigration policy. The critics have a point, but their ire is aimed in the wrong direction.
A slim majority of the justices, which gives immigration authorities the right to deny visas to would-be legal immigrants who they suspect might end up on welfare and deny continued legal status to immigrants who currently reside in the United States and make use of welfare programs. Critics have blasted the Supreme Court for this ruling — Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called it " " — but this blame is misplaced. The justices simply ruled on whether the law permits the policy (I’ll leave that debate to the lawyers), and the court's decision to uphold it doesn’t imply that the conservative justices actually support or endorse the policy in any way.
Netanyahu pulls request for immunity on corruption charges
JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu withdrew his request for immunity from prosecution on Tuesday, hours before parliamentary proceedings were set to begin. In a statement issued on his official Facebook page, Netanyahu, who was visiting Washington ahead of the launch of President Donald Trump's peace plan, said he “decided not to let this dirty game continue." In a statement issued on his official Facebook page, Netanyahu, who was visiting Washington ahead of the launch of President Donald Trump's peace plan, said he “decided not to let this dirty game continue.
However, critics do have a point about the underlying foolishness of this. It will only discourage legal immigration at a time when we ought to increase it, and its vagaries will result in arbitrary and capricious decision-making by immigration authorities.
First, here’s what the rule actually does. According to:
"The rule that the government will now be able to enforce interprets a provision of federal immigration law that bans noncitizens from receiving a green card if the government believes that they are likely to become a ‘public charge’ — that is, reliant on government assistance. In August 2019, the Department of Homeland Security defined ‘public charge’ to refer to noncitizens who receive a variety of government benefits, including cash, health care or housing, for more than 12 months over a three-year period. The rule also considers factors such as age, employment history and finances to determine whether a noncitizen might become a public charge in the future."
Of course, I certainly don’t think we should allow swarms of immigrants to pour into the country and quickly hop onto the welfare rolls at the taxpayer’s expense. But that’s an argument for excluding immigrants from welfare, not this foolish rule, which doesn't actually change welfare eligibility requirements.
Democrats urge court to block rule on detaining migrant families
The filing is the latest salvo in the government's stalled attempt to eliminate a 1997 agreement governing the care of unaccompanied migrant children and families.The Trump administration effort to eliminate time limits on the detention of migrant families was finalized in August. It was rejected a month later by a federal district judge, who said the rule, known as a Final Regulation, violated the very court settlement the government was seeking to scrap.
It also doesn’t define how government agents are supposed to know who will or won’t become a public charge, aka a welfare recipient. It gives immigration officials wide latitude in this judgment. Essentially, they will look at prospective immigrants (note that the rule exempts refugees and other humanitarian classes of immigrants) and just guess who might end up on welfare and deny them visas. Officials could even deny a prospective immigrant as a possible “public charge” even if the immigrant never before used any kind of welfare.
This is extremely arbitrary. It's nearly impossible to tell which immigrants will find work and which won't. Many immigrants come to this country as unskilled laborers without a penny in their pockets but end up building successful businesses,, and having children who often .
Trump State of the Union: Setbacks and successes since last year’s address to Congress
Every president’s time in office is marked by high points and low points, but for President Trump there seemed to be no middle ground over the last 365 days. With his third State of the Union address only hours away, here is a look at Trump’s successes and setbacks since he last addressed Congress.
Plus, the rulethat, according to the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, even a current U.S. resident immigrant who earns 200% of the poverty line and is 95% self-sufficient could be denied a green card. How does turning a productive, law-abiding immigrant into an illegal immigrant because they participated in one small government program make any sense at all?
It’s hard to estimate the exact numbers, but a substantial decrease in legal immigration will result from implementing this rule. Some suspect it couldin hundreds of thousands fewer legal immigrants each year. In a time of , , and , decreases in legal immigration are the last thing we need.
Slashing legal immigration is, , and certainly not a win for prospective immigrants and their families. In fact, perhaps the only people who really win from this are border-smuggling coyotes, under-the-table employers, and others who profit from illegal immigration, which is always fueled by added barriers to legal entry.
If we want to reduce immigrant reliance on welfare, a goal to which I’m sympathetic, even though it’s already true thatdo not receive welfare, we’d be better served by allowing only U.S. citizens to be eligible for various welfare programs. That’s a much better route than denying people legal status altogether on the mere suspicion of possible future welfare use.
Dozens protest after man shot in face by ICE agent in Brooklyn .
NEW YORK (1010 WINS) - Dozens of people protested outside a hospital in Brooklyn Thursday evening after a man was shot in the face by a U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement officer the day before. listen to the audio The protest was outside Maimonides Medical Center, where Eric Diaz Cruz was hospitalized in critical condition. He allegedly intervened when ICE agents tried to arrest his mother's boyfriend on West 12th Street in Gravesend Wednesday morning--and was shot in the face.Federal authorities were trying to arrest Gasper Avendano-Hernandez, a Mexican accused of being in the country unlawfully.
Impeachment Trial Day 7: Trump team to conclude defense as Democrats push for witnesses
President Trump's defense team is set to conclude its arguments on Tuesday as Democrats continue to push Republicans to allow new witnesses, particularly ...
Donald Trump's entire immigration speech (with Closed Captions)
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump laid out his step-by-step immigration plan in Phoenix, Arizona.