The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Trump Administration Wins 5-4 in Supreme Court That America Has the Right to Choose Better Immigrants Over Worse Immigrants
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the Washington Post:

Supreme Court allows Trump administration to proceed with ‘wealth-test’ rules for immigrants

By Robert Barnes and Maria Sacchetti
Jan. 27, 2020 at 3:54 p.m. PST

The Supreme Court on Monday allowed the Trump administration to begin implementing new “wealth-test” rules making it easier to deny immigrants residency or admission to the United States because they have or might use public-assistance programs.

The decision, issued in response to an emergency petition made by the administration, lifts a nationwide injunction imposed by a district judge in New York. That means the government can begin applying the new standards, which critics say would place a burden on poor immigrants from non-English speaking countries, while legal challenges continue in lower courts. ..

All four of the court’s liberal justices — Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — noted their disagreement. Neither side explained its reasoning, which is not uncommon in such emergency motions.

Let me guess what an opinion by the losing 4 would include … “Statue of Liberty” … “American Dream … “wretched refuse” … “not who we are!” … “discrimination” … “civil rights” … “Emmett Till” … It would be like a Christopher Caldwell fever dream.

According to the new policy, immigrants would be suspect if they are in the United States legally and use public benefits — such as Medicaid, food stamps or housing assistance — too often or are deemed likely to someday rely on them. The new criteria provide “positive” and “negative” factors for immigration officials to weigh as they decide on green-card applications. Negative factors include whether a person is unemployed, dropped out of high school or is not fluent in English.

It’s like Moneyball for immigration or how college admissions work: you look at applicants and pick the ones likely to turn out the best for you and yours. But baseball and college are not who we are. Instead, playing the chump for the rest of the world is who we are.

Or at least a big fraction of the Supreme Court seem to feel that way, as does just about everybody with a hand on The Megaphone.

“It’s a sad day in America when the U.S. Supreme Court affirms a completely discriminatory policy that measures the worth of a person — not by the strength of his or her character — but by the size of the person’s bank account,” said a statement from the National Partnership for New Americans. …

Federal officials say the rule ensures that immigrants can cover their own expenses in the United States without burdening taxpayers for food, housing and other costs. U.S. officials note that the change is not retroactive and exempts refugees and asylees who fled persecution for safety in the United States.

Lawsuit says Trump’s green-card rules show preference for ‘the wealthy and the white’ …

Daniels declared the proposed change would be “repugnant to the American Dream of the opportunity for prosperity and success through hard work and upward mobility.” …

Francisco has complained to the Supreme Court before about such nationwide injunctions, and he is finding at least some of the justices receptive.

Gorsuch filed a separate opinion, joined by Thomas, that said lawyers are racing to courts around the country hoping to get a stay from one judge that can shut down an entire program. …

But Leopold said he worried that “the Supreme Court has become a virtual agency of the Trump administration” on immigration …

Among those affected will be people of color and people with disabilities, lawyers said.

 
Hide 147 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Forbes says:

    Why should non-citizens receive ANY welfare benefits?? And of course it’s discrimination. You want to emigrate to the US, you must not be a burden on the public.

    • Replies: @Anon7
  2. Anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:

    You mean better ones like high IQ Jews? How did that turn out?

    Btw, walls work.

  3. Anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s gonna be great taking in all those high IQ Hindus, 80% of whom vote Democratic.

  4. How about a test to determine the likelihood that the immigrant will undercut the wages of an American Citizen?

    • Agree: Paleo Liberal, Old Prude
    • LOL: Mr McKenna
    • Replies: @Hail
    , @Mr. Anon
    , @Mr. Grey
  5. Oh! The unmitigated gall of a country’s citizens wanting to keep potential or actual freeloaders out of their country. The Statue of Liberty is weeping real tears as I type.

  6. Among those affected will be people of color and people with disabilities, lawyers said.

    Meteor destroys Manhattan, women and mirities most affected.

    • Agree: Some Guy, lhtness
    • Replies: @bigdicknick
  7. OT: Andrew Peek was escorted off of the White House compound last week. John Bolton says the NSC had the only released copy of his upcoming book that was leaked to NYT.

    I got 2+2=5. What say you?

  8. teotoon says:

    “It’s a sad day in America when the U.S. Supreme Court affirms a completely discriminatory policy that measures the worth of a person — not by the strength of his or her character — but by the size of the person’s bank account,” said a statement from the National Partnership for New Americans. …

    Then would the National Partnership for New Americans approve a battery of psychological tests accompanied by 2 reference letters from people of proven good character? I didn’t think so.

  9. Jack D says:

    Among those affected will be people of color and people with disabilities, lawyers said.

    Headline at the end of time:

    “World Ends: Women and Minorities Hit Hardest.”

  10. Mr. XYZ says:

    It’s like Moneyball for immigration or how college admissions work: you look at applicants and pick the ones likely to turn out the best for you and yours.

    Steve, your approach here is certainly brutally honest from a pure national interests perspective.

    • Replies: @notsaying
  11. Neil Gorsuch wrote a blistering concurring opinion warning federal judges about their activism.

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/neil-gorsuch-issues-savage-rebuke-to-activist-judges-and-nationwide-injunctions/

    • Thanks: Mr McKenna
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    , @Charon
  12. Hail says: • Website

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — noted their disagreement.

    Ginsburg: Born March 1933; all grandparents Jewish; father born in Odessa, Russian Empire (imm. 1909); maternal line origins in Burshtyn, Ukraine (then Austrian Empire) (imm. ca.1900); surnames: Bader, Millstein, Amster (a.k.a. Auster), Dick.

    Breyer: Born Aug. 1938; all grandparents Jewish; paternal ancestry Romanian Jewish (imm. 1870s?); maternal ancestors Polish Jews from Suwalki, Russian Empire (imm. ca. early 1890s), surnames: Breyer, Friedman, Rabinowicz (changed to ‘Roberts’ in the US), Berlin.

    Sotomayor: Born June 1954; Puerto Rican; at-least-nominal Catholics who raised Sotomayor a Catholic; parents seem to have settled in the mainland US ca.1950.

    Kagan: Born April 1960; all grandparents Jewish; paternal ancestry in Bialystok, Russia (imm. 1910s? or early 1920s); maternal ancestry in Ukraine (imm. 1900s?) present in the US mid-Atlantic (grandmother born in Atlantic City in 1909); surnames: Kagan, Smilovitz, Gitelman, Bokelman (or Brookman).

    –> 1912 is the average time of ancestor entry for these people’s ancestral lines (1909, 1900, 1875, 1890, 1950, 1950, 1920, 1900 [this one is slightly spec.]) (1899 if counting only the three Jewish judges.) (Range: 1870s to 1950.)

    • Replies: @Sgt. Joe Friday
    , @Kronos
    , @anon
  13. A123 says:

    Common sense out of the Supreme Court is good to see, although far too rare.

    The real hope is if Trump gets 2 or 3 more appointments. Two liberals are aged and one is diabetic.

    — Ruth Bader Ginsburg 87
    — Stephen Breyer 82

    — Sonia Sotomayer 66

    The scourge of the misinterpreted XIV Amendment is the absurd concept of ‘birthright citizenship ‘ by geography (instead of legal jurisdiction). Imagine how much better off U.S. Citizens would be without anchor babies from tourists and illegals. Trump should be able to permanently plug this hole with the right case heard by SC Justices who will follow the Constitution.

    PEACE 😇

  14. @Anonymous

    Self correcting problem. The highest IQ Muslims and Hindus are physicians and computer science MSes/Docs. They hate each other, like KKK and Black Panther level hate. I have seen the crazy.

    A few more dumber family members imported and the terror war will kick off.

    Hindus will win, because Muslims know how to stick together by family, but Hindus know how to burrow into and rig administrations and fake the results of every investigation and study

    • Replies: @Gross Terry
  15. For the liberals who love Canada so much, look up Canada’s immigration laws and see how open they are.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  16. Anonymous[174] • Disclaimer says:

    Daniels declared the proposed change would be “repugnant to the American Dream of the opportunity for prosperity and success through hard work and upward mobility.”

    You’ve heard of the American Dream Amendment. It’s in the Constitution right after the Give Me Your Tired Your Poor Amendment and right before the Emanations and Penumbras Amendment.

    I’m shocked, stunned and surprised that Justice Gorsuch & Co. weren’t moved by such a compelling, well reasoned legal argument based on long-standing US law.

    • Agree: Hibernian
  17. Ohhh, that’s nice. We can expect to be watered down, by a more respected, wealthier class of foreigners.

    Boy many of you people just don’t get it.

    • Replies: @Joe Schmoe
  18. Waiting for the right to choose no immigration over good immigration.

  19. I admit that it is troublesome the vote was even that close. Apparently members of the Supreme Court are unaware of the preamble to the constitution as well as the immigration laws and powers of the US.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  20. Kronos says:

    It’s like Moneyball for immigration or how college admissions work: you look at applicants and pick the ones likely to turn out the best for you and yours. But baseball and college are not who we are. Instead, playing the chump for the rest of the world is who we are.

    Depends on the game and the rules Steve. Contemporary US immigration policy is (or was?) based on the criteria of taking back inner cities from blacks. That requires a tougher, meaner (and perhaps dumber) immigrant. Someone who’s not afraid of fights, gunshots, and 18 murders around their neighborhood before breakfast. The goal’s been to find shock troops/cannon fodder, not fancy medical doctors who’ll run at a drop of a hat. We need inbred Pakistanis with 14 mentally handicapped kids so if 8 die from drive-bys there are still some left to further reproduce. This game requires intense R-Strategy reproductive attrition, quality K-strategy reproducers can go to Australia.

    Immigrants who are sometimes “too stupid to die” from gunshots or broken spines are just what we need in this war.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
  21. Roger says:

    Hillary Clinton almost got two appointments to the Supreme Court. Thanks for the reminder that all is not lost yet.

  22. JimB says:

    Lawsuit says Trump’s green-card rules show preference for ‘the wealthy and the white’ …

    Isn’t this case really about giving the government the prerogative to select a talented immigrant without having to wave in his untalented extended family?

  23. newrouter says:

    importing a new voter grift

    >the National Partnership for New Americans. <

    " Our members, the country’s largest and most powerful immigrant serving organizations, have fought on the front lines of the immigrant rights movement. Our strategy is to put immigrant organizations to the center of the national conversation about immigrant integration and build their capacity to deliver quality and empowering services by, with, and for new Americans.

    We align our programs to our policy and advocacy campaigns. NPNA’s programs focus on new American civic, economic, and linguistic integration"

    https://partnershipfornewamericans.org/our-program-page/

  24. anon[138] • Disclaimer says:

    Wait, doesn’t the Zeroeth Amendment take precedent over a mere Supreme Court? It’s like the 11th Commandment only more powerfuler!

    Muh Emma Lazarus! What about her, huh?

    • Replies: @Hail
  25. Michael S says:
    @Anonymous

    Is that worse than taking in low IQ Hondurans and Congolese, who vote 95% Democrat?

    Sure, I’d prefer neither, but given the choice…

  26. @A123

    Birthright citizenship wasn’t a problem when you couldn’t bring in the rest of your family. Go back to you can only bring in your spouse and any children, we’d have less brats born for bennies here.

  27. This is basically good, and I give Trump credit for imposing this test. But I think we’re at the point where immigration is less important than refugee policy. Gaming the asylum laws is where progressives are pushing hardest. Trump needs to push back harder.

    • Agree: Charon
  28. KenH says:

    But Leopold said he worried that “the Supreme Court has become a virtual agency of the Trump administration” on immigration …

    How silly of us to forget that immigration policy is determined by activist left wing judges and ultra left, America and white hating left wing interest groups.

    But we need a 25 year moratorium combined with an aggressive program to dramatically expand white birth rates.

  29. MEH 0910 says:

  30. @A123

    The scourge of the misinterpreted XIV Amendment is the absurd concept of ‘birthright citizenship ‘ by geography

    Misinterpreted by the same quintet which have us Plessy. which was thrown out decades ago.

    Either both those decisions are right, or both are wrong. The Big Five didn’t just find Jesus in the 22-month interval.

  31. indocon says:

    Look at the comments for the Huffington Post article mentioning this news, ouch, you might think you are at the weekly newspaper of KKK.

    The Republicans should push to codify this into law, I bet this has 60%+ support today even with the demographic changes, be a hell of a way to put Democratic challenger’s and incumbent on the spot.

  32. Hail says: • Website
    @anon

    Muh Emma Lazarus! What about her, huh?

    Petition to remove the Emma Lazarus poem from the Statue of Liberty gaining steam.

    Petition created by Pete D’Abrosca.

    (Here he is on Tucker Carlson calling for an immigration moratorium:)

    [MORE]

    • Thanks: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Charon
  33. @Jim Don Bob

    His points are not just common sense, but also excellent jurisprudence – not at all political. His reasoning is probably therefor incomprehensible to the Jews on the court and their wise Latinx.

  34. Corn says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    In a nation that already has 330 million people that’s the sanest choice.

    • Agree: HammerJack
  35. Hail says: • Website
    @Buzz Mohawk

    California wants a word with you:

    Buzz Mohawk has been added to the Gavin Newsom Enemies List for this outrageous remark about “wages.”

  36. @Kronos

    Contemporary US immigration policy is (or was?) based on the criteria of taking back inner cities from blacks.

    No. It’s about taking the entire US from whites, who founded it.

    Immigrants who are sometimes “too stupid to die” from gunshots or broken spines are just what we need in this war.

    No. No more immigrants, more guns. Like I told Reg, the “inner city” is a big ol’ self-cleaning oven serving up hot, authentic attrition nutrition. Live and let die, and if the 1618s stray out the ‘hood and get violently uppity, kill ‘em leeee-guh-lee.

  37. @Hail

    Wonder if Ginsburg is related to the late Lawrence Auster.

  38. JimDandy says:

    Open borders combined with generous entitlements for all is a human right, guys. It’s just the right thing to do, and it’s what’s best for all Americans. Come on.

  39. Hail says: • Website
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Ron Unz, proprietor, is currently severely restricting use of [AGREE], but

    [AGREE]!

    Immigration Moratorium.

  40. Kronos says:
    @Hail

    Keep in mind their historical geographic locations. If they were born and raised in the big cities they very likely understand how immigration dramatically lowered their crime rates. (Mainly by dislodging blacks from critical urban sectors.) Those “liberal” Supreme Court Justices likely grew up when cites were the place to be.

    But then the “bad people” came and did “bad things” and turned prime real estate areas into “bad neighborhoods.”

    So they have a heavily invested interest to support policies that continue urban revitalization. So unlimited mass immigration is a must. Otherwise, things might slip again. Not just for personal gain but to help their friends, family, and greater community. It’s really hard to destroy such a wide network for the sake of black diversity.

    If you’ve lived in Washington D.C. for 30+ years you really don’t want another Mayor Barry running around. They likely remember those fun days all too well.

    Here’s an excerpt from the classic article by Ron Unz “Race and Crime in America.”

    https://www.unz.com/runz/race-and-crime-in-america/

    The Hidden Motive for Heavy Immigration?

    Consider also the highly contentious issue of immigration. Obviously, much of the underlying conflict is purely economic in character, with workers aware that restricting the supply of available labor will protect their bargaining power over wages, while businesses seek to maximize their profits by expanding the pool of potential employees, whether low-skilled or high-tech.

    But all involved participants quickly discover that despite endless protestations to the contrary there is also a clear racial subtext, usually accounting for the emotionality of the debate. For the last half-century, the overwhelming majority of immigrants, especially illegal ones, have been non-white, and the resulting racial fears have been a central motivating force driving many of the most zealous restrictionists, who fear being swamped by a tidal wave of “the Other.” However, I believe that racial considerations, whether fully conscious or not, might also be found on the other side of the issue, helping to explain why our national leadership today so uniformly endorses very heavy foreign immigration.

    America’s ruling financial, media, and political elites are largely concentrated in three major urban centers—New York City, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C.—and all three have contained large black populations, including a violent underclass. During the early 1990s, many observers feared New York City was headed for urban collapse due to its enormously high crime rates, Los Angeles experienced the massive and deadly Rodney King Riots, and Washington often vied for the title of American homicide capital. In each city, the violence and crime were overwhelmingly committed by black males, and although white elites were rarely the victims, their fears were quite palpable.

    One obvious reaction to these concerns was strong political support for a massive national crackdown on crime, and the prison incarceration of black men increased by almost 500% during the two decades after 1980. But even after such enormous rates of imprisonment, official FBI statistics indicate that blacks today are still over 600% as likely to commit homicide than non-blacks and their robbery rate is over 700% larger; these disparities seem just as high with respect to Hispanic or Asian immigrants as they are for whites. Thus, replacing a city’s blacks with immigrants would tend to lower local crime rates by as much as 90%, and during the 1990s American elites may have become increasingly aware of this important fact, together with the obvious implications for their quality of urban life and housing values.

  41. @Lawyer Guy

    are you insane? Importing obnoxious hindoos and muslims in the hope’s they start engaging in domestic terrorism, so one will be less singly hostile to their host country? Terrorism doesn’t just hit the intended target!

  42. @EliteCommInc.

    Ohhh, that’s nice. We can expect to be watered down, by a more respected, wealthier class of foreigners.

    Boy many of you people just don’t get it.

    Yeah, that is pretty much my reaction. But you have to start somewhere. This should have been done by Ronald Amnesty Reagan. Each piece is a legal battle. Honestly, Trump needs to send federal agents to just arrest the sheriffs and police chiefs who don’t cooperate with INS. Either they hand over illegals or they can sit in federal jail without bail. They will break so fast.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @RadicalCenter
  43. Lagertha says:

    Hurrah! And, now, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Ireland, Croatia, Hungary, Czech Republic – all the cute countries, need to follow suit. Ruin the plans of the Plunderers.

  44. Hibernian says:
    @A123

    What we need is 20 year non-renewable terms for SCOTUS Justices so we’re not holding death watches and Presidents aren’t looking for a 48 year old who’ll stay for 30 years.

    • Replies: @Kronos
  45. @MikeatMikedotMike

    Waiting for the right to choose no immigration

    Some have. At least on the internet, “immigration moratorium” is a popular phrase. That’s the only immigration policy that’s going to work going forward. It applies equally to all races and nationalities, so the left can’t bitch about ‘Muslim bans’ or whatnot.

    Also, like others have said, remove and melt down “The New Colossus” plaque. And replace Lady Liberty’s torch with a proportionate long slide 1911.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Just passing through
  46. “Each piece is a legal battle. Honestly, Trump needs to send federal agents to just arrest the sheriffs and police chiefs who don’t cooperate with INS. Either they hand over illegals or they can sit in federal jail without bail. They will break so fast.”

    and city council members, mayors, members of state congresses and governors . . .

    — not to exclude members of the clergy who engage in harboring and abetting those here illegally when no immigration policy hinders their being aided in their home country.

  47. Acadia678 says:

    Great Great News. Finally Americans win. Now SCOTUS must prohibit these nationwide injunctions by one rogue marxist federal judge.

  48. “It’s a sad day in America when the U.S. Supreme Court affirms a completely discriminatory policy that measures the worth of a person — not by the strength of his or her character

    Wait a minute…we can use strength of character as a measure??

    (What about Disparate Impact?)

  49. Charon says:
    @Jim Don Bob

    All we need are a couple more Gorsuches on the Court and maybe we can rein in the overreaching federal judges once and for all.

    Trump is not anyone’s idea of an ideal president but if we are to have any hope at all he must win in November.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  50. istevefan says:
    @R.G. Camara

    Baby steps, son.

    That is correct. We have so thoroughly lost on the issue of immigration over the past several decades that a reduction of the continued flow of 1 million-plus per year is considered as non-negotiable as the suggestion that a bloated department of the federal government have its budget cut. We are still waiting to pull troops out of the money pit also known as Afghanistan.

    Slowly but surely we have to change that mindset. It appears Trump has made progress on cutting refugees and now we have this. And he is putting up something along the border. It’s not the wall we were promised, nor is it covering the mileage we expected. But it is progress. There are still more areas that need addressed, especially chain migration, anchor babies and of course the overall magnitude of legal immigration which averages about 3000 per day.

    But we allowed this stuff to go on for too long, and everyone has become accustomed to it. And when people in America become accustomed to something, it takes a long while to change that.

    • Agree: Charon, Redneck farmer
    • Replies: @newrouter
    , @Anonymous
  51. Anon[184] • Disclaimer says:

    Just keep them all out.

    Canada has a buy-your-way-in system that has populated Vancouver with a bunch of entitled SJW Chinese immigrants.

    If you want to maintain a primarily white, Christian culture, which, according to Eric Kaufmann’s book most U.S. Asians, Hispanics, and blacks surprisingly want, you can’t just let lots of non-white, non-Christian immigrants in, whatever their wealth or intelligence.

    Blacks don’t want “chanks” or “Mexicans” running things, nor are they impressed with blacks running things. The gibme’s would dry up. Asians don’t want blacks or Hispanics running things. Hispanics want to turn white and join the white ruling class. So everyone seems to be agreed that whites primarily in charge, with a smattering of other groups, works best.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  52. newrouter says:
    @istevefan

    > It’s not the wall we were promised, nor is it covering the mileage we expected. But it is progress. <

    And Mexico is paying for their troops on its southern border restraining the horde moving north.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  53. Charon says:
    @Hail

    Thanks for posting the link.

    Nearly all of the top petitions are concerned with China, Hong Kong, and India. This is one of a very few having anything to do with America. It has all of 137 signatures so far.

  54. Dr. X says:

    According to the new policy, immigrants would be suspect if they are in the United States legally and use public benefits — such as Medicaid, food stamps or housing assistance — too often or are deemed likely to someday rely on them.

    “New policy”???

    Isn’t that the way it was 100 years ago when Ellis Island was open? If you were a cripple and couldn’t support yourself, didn’t they tell you to get back on the boat and go back to where you came from?

    • Agree: Hail
  55. danand says:

    “Trump’s green-card rules show preference for ‘the wealthy and the white’ …”

    As has been pointed out ad nauseam by many here in the past, there are practically no “whites” in the world left who seek to become US citizens: rarer than new to your hood white schoolchildren.

    imo

  56. Anon7 says:
    @Forbes

    Don’t forget the 1982 Supreme Court Plyler v. Doe decision which holds that states cannot constitutionally deny students a free public education on account of their immigration status.

    Every single illegal kid, including the millions of so-called DACA kids, steals a public school education worth about $200,000.

    Every one of those kids are a burden to the public. And it would take a constitutional amendment to plug this hole.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  57. Here’s the alternative:

    Dot Indian, gay Black, NeverTrumper

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Bill P
    , @Autochthon
  58. @Anon

    What’s surprising about it?

    If they wanted to live in China or India, they’d have never come here. And Blacks sure don’t want to live in Africa.

  59. It’s not your fault because the press coverage and fulminating was so bad, but that is not what the Supreme Court decided today, merely that if four courts rule it legal, and one court rules it illegal, the fifth court doesn’t get to impose an injunction overriding the first four courts. The Court didn’t decide which set of courts had it right on the merits.

  60. Cato says:

    Well, maybe it is a victory. But one needs to keep in mind the kind of human beings, hired by the government, who will enforce this policy. A short anecdote: A friend, born in Germany, has lived and worked legally in the US for 40 years as a college professor, achieving a very comfortable middle class lifestyle. He is married to a US citizen, and has several very talented children who are citizens. Recently, Germany allowed dual citizenship, so he decided to apply for a US passport. The ICE official at his interview was an obese black woman. My friend said that he could feel the rage and hatred in the look she gave when he entered the interview room. His application was denied. I suppose the obese black woman felt that my friend was “not who we are.”

  61. Mr. Anon says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    How about a test to determine the likelihood that the immigrant will undercut the wages of an American Citizen?

    Or a test to determine if they like actual American citizens or if they will fundamentally alter the character of the already existing country.

    • Agree: Old Prude
  62. Mr. Anon says:
    @Desiderius

    What’s the difference between Rick Wilson and a colostomy bag?

    • Replies: @FPD72
    , @Desiderius
    , @Rob
  63. Anonymous[781] • Disclaimer says:

    “It’s a sad day in America when the U.S. Supreme Court affirms a completely discriminatory policy that measures the worth of a person — not by the strength of his or her character

    How surprisingly unsurprising that the immivasion lobby presents yet another criterion on which we’re supposed to judge immigrant worth which is purely subjective and entirely immeasurable. Just like the notion that America is a “proposition nation,” even though they never tell us what that proposition is, and how we’re supposed to determine who genuinely believes in it and who does not.

    In their minds, if you want to come to America then you have “strength of character” and believe in the (as yet undefined) “American proposition.” Nevermind that coming to America these days, for the vast majority, is nothing like coming on dangerous ships in the 1600s and is more like a little road tri[ plus a few days of hiking.

  64. @Cato

    Which means he could have become an American citizen 30 or 35 years ago if he had been willing to give up his German citizenship for it — and sadly, this choice was forced by the Germans, not us.

    Regardless, America doesn’t need any more dual citizens. I certainly don’t approve of rudeness, but yes, perhaps having some hard nosed black women handle immigration interviews is exactly a good use of their potential.

  65. Hilariously, this is the court that went 5-4 regarding black letter law that Steve thought would rollback the CRA and the legal regime of ‘the 14AMD means whatever I want it to mean whenever I want it to mean it’.

  66. But Leopold said he worried that “the Supreme Court has become a virtual agency of the Trump administration” on immigration …

    Yeah, like it wasn’t one during demo administrations. Or frankly during many repub administrations. There’s not one liberal justice, who upon hearing a case, doesn’t look up at that big shelf of law books in their office, maybe pull one or two out, peruse them, and then say to themselves ‘I’m a democrat, so I’m voting this way.’

    When Gorsuch was on his book tour a few (several ?) months back, he made the point that something like 90 percent plus cases before SCOTUS were settled something like 7-2 or better. The thing is, those aren’t the cases the majority of Americans care about. If the right had fought like democrats 30-40 years ago, we’d live in a different country.

    • Replies: @prime noticer
  67. @Cato

    “what the Supreme Court decided today, merely that if four courts rule it legal, and one court rules it illegal, the fifth court doesn’t get to impose an injunction overriding the first four courts”

    Gorsuch pointing out something that i’ve talked about before – leftists can miss and miss and miss, but as soon as they get one hit, that’s it, game over, the issue is decided forever, for everybody.

    you might have constantly defended a particular legal issue forever, maybe even defending 100 times in a row in various courts, but as soon as leftists can get ONE court to rule against it, boom, done.

    why should we obey any rulings from that kind of system, a system which is patent nonsense.

    like many Americans, i wish Trump just started ignoring these rulings.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  68. @South Texas Guy

    ” If the right had fought like democrats 30-40 years ago, we’d live in a different country.”

    the big problem now is that if Trump is going to obey every retarded injunction or stay, then the left will win by default, because all they have to do is block everything. even if they expect the Supreme Court to rule against them, which it usually does, they still delayed Trump law by 1 or 2 years. so block, delay, place holds on every single thing they don’t like, tying it up in years of litigation, rendering Trump barely effective.

  69. @EliteCommInc.

    Agree.

    This is yet another newsflash that only 5/9 of the Supreme Court think that the Constitution is constitutional.

    What’s left of US rule of law hangs on by a single vote.

  70. @Anonymous

    It’s startling that it was such a close vote, at 5-4. These things should be 7-2 or even 9-0.
    The legal habit of using Disparate Impact to justify domestic social engineering is leaking into external issues such that it will quickly be used to justify foreign aid & immigration policy. So if Whites are only 12% of World population, then if they exceed that in immigration intake, they’ll have to be stopped.
    That the 4 dissenting justices gave no justification for wanting US Citizens to be doormats & tax slaves to the World, suggests Anti-Citizen & Anti-White motives.
    Recall that as recently as 2017, it was still as a cause celebre in Big Media to have Merrick Garland replace Scalia.
    So you’d have an ethnic group consisting only 1.5% of the population having 4/9 spots on SCOTUS.
    They really are just pushing relentlessly for a final victory & total domination. No humility, no second thoughts or caution. Just a will to invite the world plus a lust to concentrate power as a managerial Elite.

    • Agree: West Reanimator
    • Replies: @slumber_j
  71. @Desiderius

    And Blacks sure don’t want to live in Africa.

    There are exceptions, though. There may be more Helenians in Cape Town and Natal than at home on St Helena. But they consider themselves British, not black, and the Cape and Durban are scarcely representative of Africa.

  72. Anonymous[342] • Disclaimer says:

    “The content of a person’s character being measured by the contents of their bank account”.

    Jesus Wept.

    Honestly, this going beyond the bounds of surrealism and entering the depths of psychosis, ranting, schizophrenic, Delirium Tremens , unhinged ‘the Devil is possessing my Television set!’ style insanity – as demonstrated by those confined to lunatic asylums for their own protection.

    Yep.
    Try to talk that shit to the man with no medical insurance saddled with the huge bills due to the bad hand ‘providence’ dealt to him.
    The only thing preventing that man from spitting in your face – or worse – is the good manners and civility bred into him.

  73. Anonymous[901] • Disclaimer says:

    That late, great evolutionary biologist, WD Hamilton, once wrote an essay, included in his collected works ‘The Narrow Paths of Gene Land’, I believe, entitled ‘The Planetary Hospital’.

    More than a flight of fancy than anything, Hamilton tried to give the reader a taste of an inevitable dystopian future of humanity in which the force of natural selection no longer operates due to wealth accumulation and the ‘humanitarian’ distribution thereof.

    Seems to me that certain quarters wish the USA to be the figurative if not literal ‘Planetary Hospital’ right here and now.

  74. Clyde says:

    Amazing how Judge Roberts did not punk out.

    • Agree: Kronos
    • Replies: @Lagertha
  75. Bill P says:
    @Desiderius

    Odd segment considering most of the Ukrainians in my neighborhood (there are enough to support a couple Uke grocery stores) are Trump supporters.

  76. Pericles says:
    @Hail

    Gavin Newsome: “The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.”

    OMG, what a racist.

  77. Pericles says:

    So, did Ginsburg turn up in person to make that vote? Has she been seen in public since they apparently got the raging cancer under control?

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    , @Ozymandias
  78. Has Steve reviewed “On The Basis Of Sex”, the Bader Ginsburg hagiography of 2018? The trailer raised my blood pressure by 30 points 😉

    “Directed by Mimi Leder and written by Daniel Stiepleman, it stars Felicity Jones as Ginsburg”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Basis_of_Sex

  79. Kronos says:
    @Hibernian

    Maybe, but just not now…

  80. slumber_j says:
    @CrunchyButRealistCon

    It’s startling that it was such a close vote, at 5-4.

    That was my immediate reaction. It reminds me of Norm Macdonald on Germany v. Rest of World in WWII: “You figure that would take The World about five seconds to win, but no–it was actually close!”

    • Agree: Ron Mexico
  81. Instead, playing the chump for the rest of the world is who we are.

    No worries, mate: The EU and the UK have the US trumped when it comes to catering to migrants.

  82. IHTG says:
    @Anonymous

    Higher IQ, lower birthrate.

  83. It’s a sad day in America when the U.S. Supreme Court affirms a completely discriminatory policy that measures the worth of a person — not by the strength of his or her character

    Why can’t we do both? The more filters, the better.

  84. anon[414] • Disclaimer says:
    @Joe Schmoe

    Agreed. Trump is gutless. He waffled on E-verify, remittances, the wall — and will not even enforce the law as it is currently written!

    At least the Indios work and don’t commit too much crime. Not a force for good, to be sure, but perhaps not an unmitigated disaster either. Love it or leave it, I suppose.

    I do like Hawley or Kobach on the next Republican ticket.

  85. “But baseball and college are not who we are. Instead, playing the chump for the rest of the world is who we are.”

    I guarantee zionist justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg is among those who voted for open borders. For the goyims of course, there is just no space in israel.

    It is insane that these people both overrule existing law on moral grounds, but then believe those moral ideas don’t apply to their own ethnostate.

  86. @Hail

    Parenthetical final verse: (Just warn them not to bring any plastic straws in their baggage.)

  87. Anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:

    If Roe v. Wade is repealed, the effects of the additional Blacks, Browns, and leftist Whites being born will likely outweigh the effects of any immigration restrictions put into effect. Abortion is one of the only forms of eugenics we have left.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    , @c matt
  88. @Pericles

    If the libs have substituted an RBG body-double imposter then this decision really is not who we are, or who she is, or something

  89. @Daniel Williams

    America is a nation of the disabled.

  90. @teotoon

    Then would the National Partnership for New Americans approve a battery of psychological tests accompanied by 2 reference letters from people of proven good character? I didn’t think so.

    I think “strength of character” now means degree of distance from having white skin.

  91. Anonymous[467] • Disclaimer says:
    @istevefan

    Regarding Chain Migration and Anchor Babies, Trump could do more on those fronts. Just like Ann Coulter has said repeatedly about building the wall (and Trump has apparently -finally- figured out), you don’t need Congress to tackle those two critical issues.

    Maybe Trump’s waiting for a RUTHless Supreme Court to issue that long awaited EO on anchor babies just as an insurance policy in case Roberts cucks on the matter, but SCOTUS in June of 2018 in the so called Moslim Travel ban case upheld his ability to suspend entry of any class of aliens he believes would be detrimental to the interests of the US.

    He could right this minute issue an EO halting both chain migration of non-nuclear family members and the Diversity Visa lottery, both of which he has called “disasters” on numerous occasions.

  92. Erik L says:
    @Anonymous

    Pretty well. You’re welcome

  93. FPD72 says:
    @Mr. Anon

    A colostomy bag is full of crap only half the time?

  94. @Joe Schmoe

    Yes, but simply enforcing an english fluency requirement would have disqualified more than ten million legal immigrants over the past few decades alone. Not broken or rudimentary English but functionally fluent written and spoken English. Sounds like a great start to me.

  95. @Hibernian

    They’re en route to becoming a terribly crowded, polluted, unaffordable, lower-trust place dominated by Chinese and Indians. Not our role model for immigration policy.

  96. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Immigration moratorium on purely economic grounds would be very good optics, it would satisfy those who want less immigration but feel
    squeemish about race, and will also satisfy those that were previously vocal about the race aspect.

  97. @Desiderius

    I am pretty sure they must also be aware that increase diversity means increased social tension and negative effects for all including themselves. Women have this ‘queen bee’ mentality, if they get to the top they will do everything to keep other women down, British PM Margaret Thatcher didn’t any women ministers for example. Perhaps there is a similar phenomenon with immigrants?

  98. Rob McX says:

    If there are any grounds on which you can’t exclude immigrants, it means the other 7bn people in the world have some claim on your country that trumps your right to decide who gets in. That’s the beginning of the end for any country.

  99. @MikeatMikedotMike

    Exactly.

    There is a simple, non-discriminatory “American friendly” immigration policy: no one.

    If there’s really someone with extraordinary skills–great work in say Thorium cycle, or battery tech, or genomics or vaccine tech–and compatible with America’s core ideas of historic Anglo-Saxon liberties and limited republic government, we could give the President a quota of say 5000 slots a year for him to make offers.

    But it’s an absolute joke that our nation of 330 million “needs people”. Only people who hate the American core and wish to wreck it believe that.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @notsaying
  100. @Anonymous

    Well, three of them on the Supreme Court just voted in favor of unlimited immigration. Biggest mistake in this country’s history

  101. @Anonymous

    I’d agree abortion has probably been eugenic for the US as whole. In general, smarter women have their ducks in a row on birth control and don’t rely on abortion.

    A few quick points:

    — Abortion as policy isn’t the same issue as the unconstitutional national imposition of it. (Along the same lines Chris Caldwell talks about with regard to “Civil Rights”.) Constitutionally it’s a state matter and the various states would have worked out various policies according to their various local sentiments.

    — Within some subgroups–for instance blacks–abortion may not be eugenic. Smarter, better educated black women have very low fertility and that may be because when they are unmarried they abort, while perhaps the dumber ones do not. (This is speculative, i don’t know if there’s any data out there about abortion rates within various education/income groups.)

    — Even with these numbers, immigration is still a way more powerful force in transforming the nation than even a abortion repeal would be. And more immediate–it’s generally young people just a few years from child bearing/raising who come.

    — In a self-confident nation–i.e. one that has pitched out minoritarianism–there are all sorts of eugenic policies–both suppressing the low end and encouraging the high end–possible.

    ~~

    Some of this may end up being rendered “moot”, by genomic technology. But even deploying that successfully will require casting off minoritarian hysterics and biting the eugenic ideological bullet.

    In the end, nations willing to chuck off the “Nazi!”, “Holocaust!”, “Hitler!” silliness and get serious about eugenics will be the ones that win–and will be the pleasant and prosperous places to live.

    • Agree: BenKenobi
  102. “If Roe v. Wade is repealed, the effects of the additional . . .”

    Great graph. Strange suggestion. i would prefer we deal with the the births than wanton murder of children

    • Replies: @Jack Henson
  103. @A123

    remember all the people who said electing Drumpthf wouldn’t do anything? Yeah, it didn’t live up to the hype, but judges matter…a lot. For all we know we’d have a nationwide gun ban and restrictions on “hate speech” right now if Crooked won. Drumpthf at least is slowing down the catastrophe.

  104. @Anonymous

    No doubt there is some SJW somewhere reading your comment, watching the video and thinking, “So right wing fascists believe we need more soldiers who can model our society to be like insects.”

  105. OT: Just saw Guy Ritchie’s new movie The Gentlemen. Funny, clever and well done. You will like it if you liked his earlier English caper move Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock,_Stock_and_Two_Smoking_Barrels

  106. @Mr. Anon

    The bag is only full of shit after it’s been used.

  107. Rob says:
    @Mr. Anon

    You can empty a colostomy bag, and it is no longer full of shit? Can we say shit here?

  108. c matt says:

    It’s a sad day in America when the U.S. Supreme Court affirms a completely discriminatory policy that measures the worth of a person — not by the strength of his or her character — but by the size of the person’s bank account

    And here I thought the ability to support yourself without leeching off of taxpayer largess said something about the strength of your character. Silly me.

  109. keypusher says:

    Trump Administration Wins 5-4 in Supreme Court That America Has the Right to Choose Better Immigrants Over Worse Immigrants

    I am sorry to say, that is not what happened. All the Court did was set aside the nationwide injunction* issued by a single judge in New York that had prevented the government from implementing its new policy, intended to enforce Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which provides that an individual seeking admission to the United States or seeking to adjust status to permanent resident (obtaining a green card) is inadmissible if the individual “at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge.” (emphasis added)

    Whether the administration’s rule (which seeks to enforce something that has been on the books as long as there has been immigration law, and has been enforced with varying degrees of vigor) is actually “constitutional,” as determined by five justices, is still an open question, to be answered in litigation that probably won’t even reach the Court until after this administration is no longer in office and the rule has been rescinded, rendering the issue moot.

    Gorsuch explains the problem with injunctions in admirably plain and clear language:

    There are currently more than 1,000 active and senior district court judges, sitting across 94 judicial districts, and subject to review in 12 regional courts of appeal. Because plaintiffs generally are not bound by adverse decisions in cases to which they were not a party, there is a nearly boundless opportunity to shop for a friendly forum to secure a win nationwide. The risk of winning conflicting nationwide injunctions is real too. And the stakes are asymmetric. If a single successful challenge is enough to stay the challenged rule across the country, the government’s hope of implementing any new policy could face the long odds of a straight sweep, parlaying a 94- to-0 win in the district courts into a 12-to-0 victory in the courts of appeal. A single loss and the policy goes on ice—possibly for good, or just as possibly for some indeterminate period of time until another court jumps in to grant a stay. And all that can repeat, ad infinitum, until either one side gives up or this Court grants certiorari. What in this gamesmanship and chaos can we be proud of?

    * The new policy is still enjoined in Illinois, because the judge there didn’t issue an injunction covering the entire country, meaning that stay will remain in place until the Illinois litigation is finally resolved, probably by the Supreme Court.

    • Replies: @Eagle Eye
    , @Autochthon
  110. c matt says:
    @Anonymous

    Am I reading the graph correctly? Births per 1000, even for hispanics, is at only 80.2? Doesn’t that translate to a TFR of .80, well below the 2.1 needed for replacement? (TFR being measured by denominator of 100 women, so you multiply the 1000 rate by 10). 10 x 80.2/1000=.802 if my math is right.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  111. As long as we don’t bring over the habitual criminals. After all some one has to pick up the garbage. What, you expected an IQ type 115 to pick up your garbage!

  112. @EliteCommInc.

    I’m always a little disgusted by the giant brains here who cheer the human sacrifice of innocents while aborting the idea of taking up arms against those responsible for our current predicament.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
  113. notsaying says:
    @Mr. XYZ

    It’s about time we had some brutal honesty about immigration. We can’t bring in all the people who want to come here and live. There is no good reason why the all of the parents, brothers, sisters, brother-in-laws, sisters-in-laws, nieces and nephews of prior immigrants should be allowed to come here and yet that’s how our laws are today.

    It’s just too many people we don’t need. We can at least stop bringing in the poor relatives of poor immigrants and stop making our government support them.

    The only thing bad about this is that it’s not a final ruling on the executive order — and that the executive order was not a law signed by Congress.

    I do wonder about provisions for the disabled though. I am not so sure we should refuse to provide Medicaid to all the disabled, that might be discrimination.

  114. notsaying says:
    @AnotherDad

    compatible with America’s core ideas of historic Anglo-Saxon liberties and limited republic government

    You only want immigrants who agree with you?

    That hardly seems fair.

    I myself want far fewer immigrants (including legal) to come in but I want far more liberties than my Anglo-Saxon, long-dead peasant relatives in 1300 Britain ever had and I am not a small government conservative, either. I am an American too.

  115. notsaying says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Not much danger of that. We — people who want less immigration — can’t even get the numbers for legal immigration cut 5% or 10%, much less 100%. There are some calls for a moratorium but I know that will never happen and do not even want anything so extreme.

    But then I am not on the right, either. I am that rare Democrat who wants fewer newcomers.

  116. “remember all the people who said electing Drumpthf wouldn’t do anything? Yeah, it didn’t live up to the hype, but judges matter…a lot. For all we know we’d have a nationwide gun ban and restrictions on “hate speech” right now if Crooked won. Drumpthf at least is slowing down the catastrophe”

    Dog gone it. it did do something. But the president simply missed those opportunities.

    ——————————————-

    “There are some calls for a moratorium but I know that will never happen and do not even want anything so extreme.”

    That is not extreme it is prudent. At the very least reasonable until we get our immigration issues ironed out.\

    ————————–

    “Am I reading the graph correctly? Births per 1000, even for hispanics, is at only 80.2? Doesn’t that translate to a TFR of .80, well below the 2.1 needed for replacement? . . . immigration.

  117. Among those affected will be people of color and people with disabilities, lawyers said.

    World ends tomorrow, women and minorities hardest hit.

  118. Mr. Grey says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Isn’t that the reason elites (Dems and Republicans) push immigration in the first place?

  119. Escher says:

    Among those affected will be people of color and people with disabilities, lawyers said.

    Wait, so are these lawyers racistly saying that people of color are more likely to be unemployable and dependent on government benefits?

    • Replies: @Lagertha
  120. Eagle Eye says:
    @keypusher

    All the Court did was set aside the nationwide injunction* issued by a single judge in New York …

    Why do we let a single judge, unelected and with lifetime tenure, hold the U.S. Government to ransom?

    District Courts and the U.S. Courts of Appeal are creatures of statute, not required under the Constitution (which in any event has been interpreted to be very flexible whenever it seemed to restrict the totalitarian powers of Leftist autocrats such as Woodrow “Wanted War” Wilson and FDR.

    We could simply pass a statute requiring injunctions against the government to be considered and decided on by three appellate judges, randomly selected from different appellate districts.

    So why wasn’t this done a long time ago?

    The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Corn
  121. Tim says:

    I bet emergency rooms across the country are loosing their lines starting . . . NOW!

    I bet things more so fast in the emergency room, that it’s not even worth a Pakistani 4th wife’s time to start a cooking fire in the waiting room.

  122. Yngvar says:

    “..would place a burden on poor immigrants from non-English speaking countries..”

    They mean the Greek Menace.

  123. “I’m always a little disgusted by the giant brains here who cheer the human sacrifice of innocents while aborting the idea of taking up arms against those responsible for our current predicament.”

    Tragic.

  124. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Eagle Eye

    We could simply pass a statute requiring injunctions against the government to be considered and decided on by three appellate judges, randomly selected from different appellate districts.

    So why wasn’t this done a long time ago?

    Because cucks gotta cuck. You’re asking the so called good guys to do something that would actually work. Until and unless voters quit voting for them for cucking, which has not happened yet, they will cuck their ass off.

    Why does Cucksas not have a Presidential primary the same day as Iowa, or a week later? Because the state founded by cuckoo birds calling themselves Jayhawks is still run by cuckoo birds, though some now call themselves Wildcats, Shockers or Gorillas.

  125. @Jack Henson

    “I’m always a little disgusted by the giant brains here who cheer the human sacrifice of innocent,s while aborting the idea of taking up arms against those responsible for our current predicament.”

    There’s also the strong possibility that none of them are stupid enough to mention “taking up arms” on the internet…

  126. Anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @c matt

    No, you’re reading it wrong. The vertical axis is births per year, not total fertility rate.

  127. Corn says:
    @Eagle Eye

    Not to get too radical but I believe it’s been mentioned the only federal court the Constitution explicitly mentions or requires is the Supreme Court.

  128. @Desiderius

    It’s like I’ve looked in on my my twelve-year-old niece and her friends having a slumber party and overheard them giggling about how clever their wise-cracks regarding how “dorky” that girl Sarah Wilson in second period are.

    Remember the McLaughlin Group, the McNeil-Lehrer News Hour, Nightline, Edward R. Murrow, etc.? Hell, Dick Cavett interviewing eccentric and irreverent people like John Lennon involved more decorum and substance. I’ve seen banter between the hosts and the contestants on gameshows that did.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  129. @keypusher

    Forget it, Jake; laymen will never understand interlocutory appeals.

  130. Anon7 says:

    OT: It’s off-topic, but I thought there was a place for this little song about Brexit in this thread.

  131. Lagertha says:
    @Clyde

    He is getting “woke” about which side is the winning team. And, perhaps, threats of taking his children away from him have subsided….although, that’s just a conspiracy theory.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
  132. Lagertha says:
    @Escher

    these lawyers racistly saying that people of color are more likely to be unemployable and dependent on government benefits

    Yes. And, this is the hilarious, soon-to-be-awful reality for sane people who identify as Democrats/Independents – this MUST BE EXPOSED, every day, during all future elections.

    Democrat & Independent parents must realized that they, and their children’s economic well-being will get worse, with any, and all Progressives who come into power in the future. The present is bad enough. Both coasts are bleeding Republicans, so suburbs are gonna be awful in 10 years. The transition is really ominous.

    Sometimes I have these weird thoughts (of course 😉 ) that the plunderers who want to destroy this country (in order to establish a totalitarian state) have fantasies of hordes of homeless, mostly white people, on the streets of cities. And, if they can then unleash a coronavirus-like killer on these poor souls, it would finally be justice for the centuries of harm due to White Privilege. I mean, the contempt for these people (us) has already been seen on national tv (Hillary, Don Lemon, Stewart, Kimmel, Wilson, Romney, Flake, and the dead people etc.) Progressives, so called, are really the ones that need to get woke. They have been used for soooo long.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
  133. @Anonymous

    This doesn’t increase immigration from anywhere, but it does decrease immigration from a lot of places. So your point is incorrect.

  134. guest says:

    “Wealth test”

    As of a buncha trust fund kids are gonna come streaming in.

    More like PRODUCTIVITY test. Or Parasite test.

  135. @Cato

    A short anecdote: A friend, born in Germany, has lived and worked legally in the US for 40 years as a college professor, achieving a very comfortable middle class lifestyle. He is married to a US citizen, and has several very talented children who are citizens. Recently, Germany allowed dual citizenship, so he decided to apply for a US passport. The ICE official at his interview was an obese black woman. My friend said that he could feel the rage and hatred in the look she gave when he entered the interview room. His application was denied.

    Your friend ist ein weltklasse Bullschitter!

    For a start, you cannot apply for a US passport as a dual , only citizenship. The US does not care if you remain a citizen of your birth country, because you will still have to pay taxes on your worldwide income to the US, and you will lose the right to consular representation in the US.

    Secondly, as the spouse of a US citizen and a long term resident he would automatically be eligible for citizenship.

    Thirdly, ICE does not do citizenship interviews. It is USCIS.

    Fourthly, under those circumstances you can only be disqualified at the citizenship interview on a technicality, for example you have a court order to pay compensation, but have not paid it off, or have some kind of criminal conviction blocking your eligibility, like an arrest for prostitution or some kind of immorality, perhaps. Otherwise he would be well advised to get an immigration lawyer to appeal his case if he was not given a official letter with legitimate grounds explaining the denial.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  136. @Autochthon

    Koppel and Lehrer were the gold standard.

    https://kottke.org/20/01/jim-lehrers-rules-of-journalism-1

    It’s a mark of how ill-suited even the best women are for the business that Judy Woodruff has allowed herself to become so corrupted since his passing.

    Hard to say on Murrow, but McLaughlin was closer to present day CNN than the heyday of quality reportage. We should leave the journalism to the novelists.

  137. Jack D says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Regardless of whether he got all the details and terminology right (maybe something got lost in translation) I have been in bureaucratic situations with nasty black women and it is just as he says – you can feel the rage and hatred the minute you enter the room. You are whitey who lorded it over her people and raped them for 400 years and now it’s payback time, cracker! Meanwhile, you just know that if the next person in line is black, they are going to get approved for whatever it is. Of course if it’s Philly and something big, then even the black has to pay the proper bribe or hire the Councilman’s wife:

    https://www.inquirer.com/news/kenyatta-johnson-indictment-city-council-dawn-chavous-charged-universal-companies-kenny-gamble-20200129.html

    Even at the Federal judge level, whenever you see some poor white guy convicted for “lying to a Federal agent” or some other bogus crime, 9 time out of 10 the judge is a black woman appointed by Obama.

  138. @Jack D

    Regardless of whether he got all the details and terminology right (maybe something got lost in translation)

    100% likelihood, given all the arcane fraud prevention measures you have to go through to pass muster with any government bureaucracy. Thing is either these measures don’t work, or exceptions are made for Muslims like Ilhan Omar and the Tsarnaev family – refugees who return frequently on vacation to the very countries they fled in fear for their lives.

  139. Lagertha says:
    @Lagertha

    the conspiracy is: his adopted children will be taken from him.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS