Tag: Islam

Closing Remarks

Closing Remarks

As our blog coms to end we can’t help but ponder the future we will face as citizens and the future immigrants will face to become citizens. Over the last few weeks we have discussed high value issues like the Trump Travel Ban, efforts to build the U.S. Mexico border wall, Trump and his words and actions on immigration, and the morality and impossibility of the proposed measures. We hope that you enjoyed our perspective on the eve changing idea of immigration into the United States from all countries, not just Mexico or war ravaged areas. We hope that you see humans just as we do in searching for opportunity and prosperity in the United States, no matter where the journey takes them. The foundation of this very nation is in jeopardy since this recent election and only the citizens have the power to change its course.

We strive everyday to make the world and country a better place for ourselves and our family, just as immigrants entering our country do. Have a heart and sympathize with these other families and people who can’t enter our country because one person changed their mind and said no.

We’re all for national security and keeping our country safe, but there has to be a better way. We have outline alternative methods and policies to counter Donald Trump in his ideas and executive orders. We urge you to seek the truth on your own and to not always trust what could be “fake news.” We as a nation will have to see how the presidency of Trump, one of our most ambitious political figures yet, dictates the future of immigration reform.

We appreciate any of the reads, likes, and comments. We will be signing off for good, but will still strive for the best when it comes to fair immigration reform.


-USA Immigration Site Team

“Not a pretext of religious discrimination?” Wrong

“Not a pretext of religious discrimination?” Wrong


“The exclusion of aliens is also a core federal prerogative: a power ‘inherent in sovereignty, necessary for maintaining normal international relations and defending the country against foreign encroachments and dangers…” 

On 3/27 nearly a month after Donald Trump’s proposed travel ban 2.0 was affirmed in a circuit appeals court, an amicus brief, a document filed in response for court case consideration, was filed. The authors were attorneys generals from 12 Republican led states including Texas, Florida, and Louisiana along with Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant. Headlines across the country read that Trump order was now backed by many prominent immigration prone states, the actual brief basically stated:

States included in amicus brief supporting travel ban.
  • States do not have the authority to set immigration standards that threaten citizen safety and national security.
  • Congress has delegated the case of immigration limitation to the executive branch and this is a utilization of that.
  • The order is not a pretext of religious discrimination.
  • The Obama administration also identified the same 6 countries banned as “countries of concern.”
  • “The Executive Order does not violate due process because nonresident aliens abroad have no liberty interest in seeking admission into the country; therefore, no constitutional claims accrue from a suspension of those aliens’ ability to enter.”

First and foremost not a month goes by without a U.S. citizen or SUSPECTED terrorist being killed in unmanned drone strikes, given no form of due process. Which has led to multiple lawsuits on both the Obama and Trump administrations by organizations like the ACLU and CCR. The case the states involved make in the generic facade idea of banning the terrorists and criminals, for unspoken religious reasons. The less than 1% makeup of Muslims in America mainly occupy the south and midwest which have seen major gains in Muslim followers since 2000.

Graph shows % change of Islam adherence from 2000-2010.

The states that have seen the largest rises in Muslim populations are also the same states in which Islam is the largest non Christian groups. Those states include: Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, West Virginia, and South Dakota, EIGHT of the THIRTEEN states that have also pledged their support behind the travel ban. Although the brief claims the ban is not for religious reasons, why would the state governments of the mainly Muslim populated states urge for passage? Many friends and family of those in these states would have no form of transportation unless verified already and traveling back and forth is extremely unpredictable just as in the case after the first inaction of the ban.

The lack of statistics in the brief are extremely questionable and just seem like a following of political and party politics with disregard of those living in their own states.