USA Today is reporting today that the migrant caravan that had been holed up in the sports stadium in Mexico City for the past few days has now left the capital. Their immediate goal is said to be Querétaro, a town about 120 miles to the northwest. This comes after another failure to arrange free bus transportation, this time from the United Nations. Caravan supporters suggest that the migrants’ ultimate goal may be the U.S. border at Tijuana and San Diego, at least 1600 miles from Querétaro.
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/central-american-caravan-on-november-9-update/
Data from the Department of Homeland Security show that less than 10 percent of migrants claiming asylum and have a legitimate basis for that claim. In fiscal year 2018, almost 90 percent of Central American migrants asked for asylum when they arrived at the U.S. border. Only nine percent of those claims were deemed legitimate.
Read more at breitbart.com
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/most-migrants-dont-qualify-for-asylum/
The original caravan–and the only one the major news outlets even mention anymore–is, by all accounts, still holed up in Mexico City, awaiting either additional migrants from the south, a decision on which direction to head, or. . . ? Left-leaning news sites this morning are filled with such headlines as “Fox News barely mentions caravan first morning after midterms” and “Now that the elections over, Fox News and Trump seem to have lost interest in the caravan,” yet the fact is, the caravan doesn’t seem to have budged in days. Coincidentally or not, the migrants stopped making news by staying put at the exact time of the midterms. This morning, a New York Times article purporting to be up-to-date and entitled “Caravan Walks Quietly On, U.S. Opposition a Distant Rumble,” seemed to promise new information about the group’s post-Mexico City direction. Yet a perusal of the photo-rich article reveals it has to do with the caravan when it was far south of Mexico City in Tapanatepec–eleven days ago.
Will they budge or not? As Jesse Helms used to say, more later maybe.
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/central-american-caravan-on-november-9/
The Quote Below – More Misinformation from the Media
“In an interview with the news program “Axios on HBO,” President Trump announced that he plans to issue an executive order ending birthright citizenship, the principle that everyone born in the United States, with a handful of exceptions, is automatically a citizen of the United States. . . . In fact, such an order would undoubtedly be unconstitutional. It would also violate a deeply rooted idea—that anybody, regardless of race, religion, national origin, or the legal status of one’s parents, can be a loyal citizen of this country. . . .
“The only exceptions to [birthright citizenship], in the words of the [14th] Amendment to the Constitution. . . . The only exceptions . . . are persons not ‘subjection to the jurisdiction’ of the United States. Members of Congress at the time made clear that this wording applied only to Native Americans living on reservations . . . and American-born children of foreign diplomats.” – Donald Trump’s Unconstitutional Dreams, Eric Forner, The New York Times, 10/31/18 [Link]
Fact Check of Quote: “The fourteenth Amendment states, All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. . . .” The key phrase is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” If being born in the U.S. is all that is necessary for citizenship, then why was this phrase added? Obviously it adds an additional qualification. What was it?
Contrary to what Forner says, members of Congress did not “make it clear” that jurisdiction only excluded Indians living on reservations and the children of diplomats. Here’s the explanation of Sen. Layman Trumbull who played a key role in shaping the language of the amendment and securing its passage:
“The provision is, that ‘all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof? Not owing allegiance to anyone else. That is what it means.”
The Supreme Court subsequently confirmed this interpretation in The Slaughterhouse Cases (1873), when it stated that “The phrase, ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation the children of ministers, counsels, and citizens or subjects of foreign states born within the United States.”
This language would clearly deny birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens. As citizens of foreign countries, living in in the U.S. in defiance of American law, they lack allegiance to this country and therefore do not fall under jurisdiction clause. Another Supreme Court decision upholding this view was the Elk case (1884) which ruled that an American Indian born in the U.S. was not a citizen due to his tribal allegiance.
So why do we have birthright citizenship? Its supporters often cite the Supreme Court’s Wong Kim Ark ruling in 1898. It held that the child of Chinese nationals born in this country was an American citizen. Although the parents were not U.S. citizens, it might still be argued that they fell under U.S. jurisdiction by being lawful permanent residents of the United States.
The weight of legal evidence is against the claim that the 14th Amendment upholds birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens. What is needed is a clear and unambiguous ruling from the Supreme Court. President Trump’s proposed executive order, by drawing national attention to this issue, is a helpful step toward that goal.
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/birthright-citizenship-should-be-challenged/
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/central-american-caravans-on-november-8/
An article in American Thinker rebuts the idea that mass immigration can save retirement benefits for older Americans. The article notes that immigrants can make a contribution because they generally take more in public benefits than they pay in taxes. The article advocates technological development to make the economy more productive in order to fund retirement benefits.
Read more at americanthinker.com
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/immigration-wont-save-retirement/
The original and largest caravan is regrouping itself (to perhaps reach 6000 or more persons) in Mexico City, which is providing space at the Jesus Martinez sports complex. Leaders have not announced the group’s ultimate destination, which could be any U.S. port of entry along the nearly 2000-mile border.
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/central-american-caravan-on-november-7/
The Center for Immigration Studies reports that “Newly released data show that 2016 tied with 1999 as the highest single year of immigration in U.S. history, with the arrival of 1.75 million new immigrants (both legal and illegal). The new numbers represent a continuation of the dramatic rebound in new arrivals since 2011, when annual immigration bottomed out after the Great Recession.”
Read more at cis.org
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/2016-immigration-equals-record-level/
Most of the caravan have now reached Mexico City, where they are pausing to regroup. The group is being housed in a sports complex and provided with medical and legal assistance. While the McAllen/Brownsville area of Texas remains the closest point along the U.S. border, a representative of Puebla Sin Fronteras–an organization supporting the migration–was quoted as saying that California, more than 1700 miles away, is the caravan’s actual target. A previous caravan in the spring made a similar choice but dwindled to 200 before they reached their goal. Reports suggest that the current group may linger a while in Mexico City as plans are solidified. Stay tuned.
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/central-american-caravan-on-november-6/
In response to reports that members of the migrant caravan threw rocks at Mexican police, President Trump stated, “We will consider [rocks] a firearm. . . . We’re mot going to put up with that. They want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back. I told them to consider it a rifle. When they throw rocks, like they did at the Mexico military and police, I said, consider it a rifle.”
In further comments, the president stated, “If these caravans are allowed into our country, only bigger and more emboldened caravans will follow–and you see that’s what’s happening now.”
Read more at foxnews.com
Permanent link to this article: https://www.aicfoundation.com/trump-rocks-equal-guns/