Before the election we mentioned polling data that showed Hispanic voters strongly favor (54%) immigration reductions. President Trump's strong showing with Hispanic voters seems to bear this out. Maybe D.C. talking heads will begin to understand voters across the board support immigration policies that put the interest of the American people first.
For those trying to cross into the United States illegally, the route through Sonoran Desert is especially dangerous. Taking away the jobs incentive and holding criminal employers who hire illegal aliens accountable would do much to prevent this dangerous journey.
Over this past week, writers at the New York Times have addressed immigration policies from a couple of angles as elections near.
In his October 8 column The V.P. Debate," David Leonhardt laments the missed opportunity for a real debate
While unemployment in the United States remains high, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the Department of Labor (DOL) have taken the novel step of actually moving to protect American jobs for American workers. It is novel because a review of past agency actions in prior Administrations will offer scant evidence that American workers and their interests were ever a consideration in policy making.
Few politicians seem to realize that U.S. history -- especially from the 1940s and 1950s -- provides exhilarating evidence of how reducing immigration may be one of the most effective tools for advancing racial equality.
Pres. Trump named Amy Coney Barrett as his nominee to the Supreme Court to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As a federal judge, Barrett has ruled on a couple immigration-related cases.