Immigration

America's Golden Door Is Slamming Shut

The shocking excesses of Donald Trump's immigration policy

|

There has often been a chasm between the lofty rhetoric of U.S. presidents and their actual policies. When it comes to immigration, Donald Trump does not have that problem. His rhetoric and policies are remarkably aligned. He is saying and doing things that no one—not even the most hardline restrictionists—thought imaginable a few years ago.

In 2015, Trump kicked off his election campaign with an infamous speech claiming that Mexico was sending "rapists and criminals" to America—never mind that immigrants, both authorized and unauthorized, commit crimes at far lower rates than the native-born, according to numerous studies by academics, think tanks, and the government itself. Any hope that he would dial back such dehumanizing comments once he got to the White House was quickly dashed. The president has denigrated people from "shithole countries" and resurrected long discarded blood-and-soil tropes, claiming, for example, that Central Americans fleeing organized crime and desperate poverty want to "infest" the United States. This is eerily similar to the language that nativists deployed against the Chinese, referring to them as "vermin" and "rats," when the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in 1882. Trump elides distinctions between ordinary unauthorized immigrants—including women and children who have committed no offense other than to come here without permission—and alien gangs such as MS-13, and then he calls the latter group "animals, not people."

This May, Trump invited Hungary's xenophobic prime minister, Viktor Orbán, to the White House—ending a 20-year banishment—and heaped fulsome praise on his "Hungary first" agenda. Orbán, who has erected a razor-wire fence to keep out Syrians merely passing through his country to seek asylum in Western Europe, wants America to join a new alliance of anti-immigration nations to counter bleeding-heart "globalists" who "are watching with their hands in the air" as Europe is "under invasion."

Trump himself has indulged in Orbán-style talk of invasions. At a recent Panama City, Florida, rally, the president regaled the gathered throngs with tales about the southern border. "Two or three" border agents contend with the arrival of "hundreds and hundreds of people," he lamented. "How do you stop these people?" When a fan shouted "shoot them," Trump joked that "only in the Panhandle you can get away with that statement." To be sure, he added, he "wouldn't do that." But the fact that such violence is being joked about without rebuke at his events shows the shocking depths to which the national conversation about immigration has fallen.

It would be possible to dismiss such talk as empty rhetoric if the Trump administration weren't also using every tool it can lay its hands on to advance its sweeping anti-immigration objectives. These include deterring asylum seekers, cracking down on unauthorized immigrants, making admission difficult for all but the tippy-top tier of foreigners, and generally slowing legal immigration to a crawl. Congress and the courts have thwarted some of Trump's more flamboyant plans to build a wall on the southern border that could cost upward of $60 billion and strip so-called sanctuary cities of federal funding, the pro-immigration Migration Policy Institute's Sarah Pierce and Andrew Selee note, but the president has nevertheless managed to engineer "deep shifts" in U.S. immigration policy that will have a lasting impact.

Trump is taking the unprecedented step of creating a spot in his administration for an immigration czar. The appointee's No. 1 task will be to look for new ways to control the surge of Central Americans trying to get to the United States.

It is true that after falling for nearly a decade, border apprehensions have been climbing since January, reaching almost 100,000 in April. Still, we're unlikely to see as many this year as we did in 2000 (1.6 million). And at least some of the increase is Trump's own fault: His wild threats to "close the border" have caused panicked Central Americans to hasten to U.S. soil while they still might have a prayer of getting in.

The rational response would be to cool such rhetoric. Instead, Trump is defiantly threatening to reinstate the policy of separating migrant children from their parents.  If Congress wants to prevent this, Trump says, it should pass a law allowing him to hold families with children together for more than 20 days, something that is illegal under current court rulings. But he says he won't engage in what his restrictionist pals deride as "catch and release."

Of course, Trump's administration has made little effort to build decent detention facilities that would allow it to keep asylum seekers in humane conditions. Five kids in Customs and Border Protection's care have died just since December.

Meanwhile, the administration has narrowed the eligibility criteria for asylum so that people who flee their home countries due to gang or domestic violence are disqualified. If she had arrived under the new guidance, the conservative darling Ayaan Hirsi Ali—a Somali immigrant who was the victim of genital mutilation by her Muslim family—wouldn't have been able to get into America.

Trump is not only prepared to use brutal tactics against asylum seekers to deter them. He is also prepared to make an example of Americans who help them.

Scott Warren, an Arizona State University professor and volunteer at No More Deaths, a group that leaves food and water in the desert for exhausted migrants, is facing 20 years in prison on two sets of charges: harboring, because he admitted two migrants into a makeshift desert medical shelter to administer first aid, and trespassing, because the area where he did so is a federally protected wilderness that he did not have a permit to enter. 

Border Patrol similarly invoked anti-harboring laws in February to arrest a Texas city attorney who let three Central American migrants in acute distress into her car to warm up after they flagged her on a West Texas highway.

The administration means business when it comes to interior enforcement. It has shown that it is prepared to use any law it can think of, even ones that have nothing to do with immigration, to go after anyone, activist or not, who crosses it. Incredibly, Trump has been flirting with invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807 to enlist the military in hunting down and ejecting unauthorized immigrants.

Nor is the current anti-immigration jihad limited to asylum seekers and unauthorized immigrants. Legal immigrants in every category, including the previously sacrosanct skilled workers, are in the crosshairs.

The administration has targeted for deportation legal green card holders with petty criminal records. Victims include a Polish doctor who had lived in America for 40 years, because he'd been convicted in his youth of destroying property worth less than $100. Officials last year proposed regulations that would deny visa upgrades to any immigrant in a family of four who receives $2.50 per day in public assistance. And a leaked Department of Justice memo in May showed that the administration is constructing new rationales to deport green card holders who use the limited public benefits that they are entitled to.

At the time of this writing, Trump had backed away from the ultra-restrictionist RAISE Act, which would cut legal immigration by 40 percent by scrapping many family-based categories. In its stead, he embraced his son-in-law Jared Kushner's reform plan, which would maintain current levels of immigration but reassign family-based visas to high-skilled foreigners in a bid to make America's system more "merit-based."

But in the unlikely event that Kushner manages to get his plan passed, he would have a hard time implementing it, thanks to the influence of White House aide Stephen Miller. Miller has foisted "extreme vetting" on every immigrant category, not just immigrants who pose a security risk. For example, the administration has suspended the Visa Interview Waiver program and now requires in-person interviews even for businessmen, tourists, or diplomatic personnel who simply wish to renew temporary visas. Ditto for green card applicants, all of whom now are subjected to face-to-face interviews. (In the past, only those whose applications raised some concern would be interrogated in person.) High-skilled H-1B visas are no longer renewed as a matter of course: The entire package of paperwork has to be resubmitted to ensure that foreign tech workers aren't displacing any Americans. And certain visa applicants are being required to provide not just 15 years' worth of travel, residential, and employment histories but also the usernames for all their social media accounts.

The cumulative result has been to create even more horrendous backlogs in a system long plagued by them. The average visa processing time for H-1Bs has already doubled under Trump, while denial rates have increased—and things are likely to get much worse, because an administration that prides itself on deregulation wants to make these requirements mandatory for all visa applicants.

Worse, Miller is pushing regulations to ensure that no foreigner admitted would ever become a "public charge." By this he does not mean someone likely to become wholly or substantially dependent on the state, as is currently the case. Rather, he wants to expand the term to include anyone who accepts public assistance from a long list of programs. Even among high-skilled foreign techies, only the most well-paid will likely be able to placate such theoretical worries about future welfare use.

In the absence of a physical border barrier, Miller is constructing a bureaucratic wall high enough to deter all but the most privileged would-be migrants from even trying. His plan is working: 40 percent of colleges reported a drop in international student applications in 2018, according to a study conducted by several higher education groups. H-1B petitions have fallen 15 percent.

Conservatives have long hectored immigrants to come to America legally. But this administration's determined bid to block legal channels will only compound unauthorized entry while overwhelming whatever authorized options remain, as the flood of Central American migrants clamoring for legal asylum amply proves.

The current president rode into the White House pledging to solve the immigration "crisis." In fact, he is creating it. The cause of rational and humane immigration reform has never taken a bigger beating than under Donald Trump.

NEXT: Two Cheers for Pete Buttigieg's Proposal for "Place-Based Visas" for Immigrant Workers

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. “nice”
      Even from an adbot that’s too much.
      In this article Shikha once again conflates (lies) opposition to illegal immigration with immigration in general.
      Disgusting dishonesty.

      1. That’s just the usual racist bullshit by this point.

        The second you oppose immigration by denigrating the immigrant; then you are no longer drawing a distinction between legal immigration and illegal immigration. You are simply bashing immigrants.

        1. Who is denigrating immigrants (legal)?

          1. No one. But the open borders crowd has to resort to lies and race baiting to make their case.

        2. You’re a blathering imbecile. Your inability to discern two different things isn’t something you should presume other people suffer from.

        3. “usual racist bull”
          That’s precious coming from a rabid anti-Semite like you, who actually uses the racist handle J(ew)Free.
          The insouciant hypocrisy of you leftist extremists is always jaw-dropping.

          1. who actually uses the racist handle J(ew)Free.

            Projecting much? That ‘racist handle’ is part of my name – tweaked to preserve some anonymity in a world of online assholes. But hey – apparently it serves another purpose for dogs who seem to hear/see whistles everywhere

            Hell – I wasn’t even making a direct accusation that YOU are racist even though my comment was poorly worded (should’ve used ‘one’ rather than ‘you’ but I find that use of ‘one’ silly) and could easily appear that way. But now – rather than apologize, I will say – Glad that comment triggered YOU so much YOU took the sheet off.

      2. That’s not the only thing she conflates. She alo conflates rhetoric with action.

        I’ve long thought policies on international movement to be too restrictive, but the headline and subhead of this article are ludicrously off base from the facts. The laws of the USA on this matter have been substantially the same for a long time, and I don’t see big changes under way.

        1. I agree Robert. Dalmia seems infected with TDS she’s so anti-Trump. She doesn’t point out that Trump is enforcing the laws Congress passed, or that his interpretation of that law is just as good as Obama’s, thanks to Congress writing laws where the executive branch writes the rules/laws, so as Pelosi told us, we have to pass the law to find out what our representatives are voting for.

          I’d like to add, doesn’t Dalia want Trump to keep out criminals, those with communicable diseases, and people who come here for free stuff from US taxpayers? If so, she’d support Kushner’s plan, and ignore Miller because Trump has shown he’ll hire people who take positions he doesn’t necessarily agree with.

          IMHO, no one who crosses the border without permission should be allowed to stay here anywhere other than in detention, or the country from where they came, because we don’t know if they’re terrorists, criminals, have communicable diseases, or can support themselves. I’d be OK letting them free until their court date to see if they get asylum and can prove they need it. But if they don’t show up, they should be deported ASAP. We don’t need the lawless here, and not showing up for court shows that. Heck, crossing the border without permission also shows lawlessness supported by Democrats.

    2. I for one love that Shika is advocating for America to secure its borders and limit illegal immigration.

      We need more immigrants that say no to Socialism and want to keep America’s finest traditions intact for future generations.

      1. And only letting over a million people in per year is ‘slamming the door shut’ on immigration.

    3. “SHIKHA DALMIA’s” seems to be upset about the lack of open borders.
      Just like we choose who we let live in our house, immigration policy is how we choose who we let in our country. And we do this with votes, so I don’t know why “SHIKHA DALMIA” is making a big deal about this. “Immigration policy” is each person’s say on the probability of where their neighbor is from.

      –> “Trump elides distinctions between ordinary unauthorized immigrants—including women and children who have committed no offense other than to come here without permission—and alien gangs such as MS-13, and then he calls the latter group “animals, not people.”

      No. SHIKHA DALMIA elides distinctions Trump has already made about immigrants from our southern border. Trump has refered to them as “some of them are good people.” And yes… MS-13 are animals.

  1. It would be possible to dismiss such talk as empty rhetoric if the Trump administration weren’t also using every tool it can lay its hands on to advance its sweeping anti-immigration objectives.

    It would be possible to dismiss such talk as empty rhetoric if the Lincoln administration weren’t also using every tool it can lay its hands on to advance its sweeping anti-slavery objectives.

    It would be possible to dismiss such talk as empty rhetoric if the Roosevelt administration weren’t also using every tool it can lay its hands on to advance its sweeping anti-poverty objectives.

    It would be possible to dismiss such talk as empty rhetoric if the Johnson administration weren’t also using every tool it can lay its hands on to advance its sweeping anti-segregation objectives.

    See how that works? If you start from an assumption that immigration – whether legal or illegal – is in and of itself a good thing you’re going to conclude that Top Men should be promoting open borders. If you believe otherwise, however, you might believe that Top Men should be barricading the borders.

    Just don’t question the idea that Top Men should be making these decisions or in any way suggesting that such faith in Top Men amounts to a cult of personality that denounces the cult of personality from the other side.

  2. Shikha, I get the impression you prefer open borders. Is that true? It’s turning out so well in Europe!

    1. Well, there’s a big difference going on here, between the USA and Europe. In Europe, there is a “thing” called Islamofascism. Islamic people have a bad habit of conducting suicide bombings, and destroying property and killing people because they are angry because some cartoonists implied that they are property-destroyers and people-killers! So… In summary, sad to say, Islamofascism is a “thing” because who-knows-how-many-of them, some sadly large fraction, are assholes.

      I have never heard of Hispanicism-motivated suicide bombings, or “Hispanifascism”. That Hispanic folks are getting lumped together with Islamofascists, that all must suffer and suffer alike, is one of the biggest peoples-groups injustices of our day, IMHO.

        1. Like seriously, violent Mexicans? Unheard of. Literally.

            1. https://www.historyonthenet.com/adolph-hitler

              “White folks” can be MASS-murdering shitheads, in a more organized and all-encompassing, higher-numbers manner than a few drug-dealer punk small-timers. Let’s put up walls against the white bastards!

              1. So now that you’ve had your original argument snapped off in your asshole your retort is “white people do it too!”

                Hihn you are a treasure.

                1. Hi Tulpa… Loose on the egghead front, resort to childish name-calling. So it worked for Trump, it might work for you?

                  1. It’s “lose” Hihn. If you’re going to try to take the big brain moral high ground after getting your argument absolutely fucking destroyed and having no retort at least try to spell correctly.

                  2. Hahaha you’re so afraid of me that you’re seeing things ahahahaha

              2. Hitler was an evil genocidal tyrant therefore white people = bad?

                1. Yes, this is the same idea as, a few brown-skinned drug dealers are bad (or rapists etc.), therefor, all brown-skinned folks are “Hispanifascists”.

                  1. Again with the identarian nonsense about “brown people”.

                  2. Squirrely, your comment makes no sense. First, not all Mexicans are ‘brown skinned’. Second, most brown skinned people around the world are not Mexican, or even Hispanic.

                    How can I take you race baiters seriously when you can’t even get your racism right in the first place?

                    1. Racism in the USA isn’t anywhere nearly as much as a public-policy holocaust as is the scapegoating of illegal sub-humans. Hitler had Jews to ride to political power, and Trump and many-many Shitlords have illegal sub-humans to ride as scapegoats. THAT is the REAL problem here!

                    2. Your comment is barely more than gibbering word salad. And what premise I can divine from the mess of words you puked out is utter hippo shit.

                      Hitler used a subset of citizens of his own country as a lightning ride for discontent of the citizenry. Trump is merely enforcing existing immigration laws, and killing no joe. There can be no ‘holocaust’ without mass deaths. Which do not exist here. In fact, Trump regularly praises success stories of immigrants (people who care here legally).

                      So the only analog to Hitler is really with you and your friends. Not Trump, or anyone who supports him.

                      In other words, you’re the baddie.

                    3. “Trump is merely enforcing existing immigration laws…”

                      Ha! To the “merely” part! Previous administrations didn’t wrest crying babies from Mommas’ arm! And then lose track of which baby belongs to whom! Even that asshole, FDR, didn’t do that to Japanese-American concentration camp victims! “Enforcing” laws? You OK with slowly ripping out the fingernails of anyone who opens doors or pushes elevator buttons to “aid and abet” the illegal sub-humans? W/O asking suspected sub-humans for “papers please” before “abetting” them? The next question to immediately follow “enforce?”, is, “with what level of utterly disproportionate, immoral ruthlessness”?

                    4. “Previous administrations didn’t wrest crying babies from Mommas’ arm!”

                      This happens to every person in America who gets arrested while their minor children are with them. Children don’t go with you to lock up. Ever.

                      “And then lose track of which baby belongs to whom! Even that asshole, FDR, didn’t do that to Japanese-American concentration camp victims!”

                      Obama did that. A complicit Marxist media never reported on it. And it’s more of a problem now, as our resources are stretched thin, thanks to traitors like YOU encouraging the onslaught of illegals at the border. So really, this is YOUR fault. Not Trump’s.

                      ““Enforcing” laws? You OK with slowly ripping out the fingernails of anyone who opens doors or pushes elevator buttons to “aid and abet” the illegal sub-humans? W/O asking suspected sub-humans for “papers please” before “abetting” them? The next question to immediately follow “enforce?”, is, “with what level of utterly disproportionate, immoral ruthlessness”?”

                      Hyperbole, and moronic bleating. How is it possible for you to be this stupid?

                      Now that I’ve straightened you out, feel free to thank me.

                    5. ““Previous administrations didn’t wrest crying babies from Mommas’ arm!””

                      Elian Gonzales.

                  3. Spain is a white, western European country TARDO.

              3. Deal.

                I don’t have a burning need for immigration from Germany either. In fact, America has plenty of people. If we want to make more, we can do it the old fashioned way.

                Will you take that deal, or were you just talking out of your ass?

                1. Apparently the old fashioned way is fast falling out of favor with woke xennial prudes.

                  1. Family formation goes down with lower wages and higher housing costs.

                2. “I don’t have a burning need for immigration from Germany either. ”

                  Trump’s grandpa came from Germany… Send Trump back to Germany, and make sure that he doesn’t come back here? I am WAAAAY on board with THAT!

                  1. How about we send you instead?

                  2. You were just talking out of your ass, which I’m sure leaves people simply shocked shocked shocked.

              4. Fuckin’ LOL at you immediately going Godwin.

              5. Spanish treatment of Aztecs, Inca…anyone?

              6. You racist dung-heap. Are you saying only white people can be organized and effective? RAAAAACIIIISSSSSS!

        2. Drug dealers are a threat to other drug dealers because idiot voters and idiot politicians have outlawed drugs. Drug dealers can be be purple, green, yellow, or brown. If I don’t deal drugs, they’re not that much of a threat to me. I don’t see the connection to the group injustices of punishing one group of people for the sins of another group of people. Before 9-11, we were actually on track for sensible immigration reform. Then Islamofascists (not Hispanifascists) sent us down a pretty shitty path…

          1. I don’t see the connection to the group injustices of punishing one group of people for the sins of another group of people.

            You’re literally arguing that Islamofascism justifies immigration restriction in Europe yet cartel violence, which involves far more than drugs, can’t justify immigration restrictions in the US. Try to keep your own argument straight you delusional senile old piece of shit.

            1. “…cartel violence, which involves far more than drugs…”

              Smuggling drugs and smuggling people… Both the results of USA over-restrictive micro-management, OCD power piggishness, trying to control WAAAY too much… What else ya got? Besides low-brow name-calling?

              1. Actually kidnapping is becoming nearly as profitable as drugs for the cartel. By all means let’s discuss this topic of which you know absolutely nothing in more depth in order to distract from the fact that your primary argument that Islamic violence justifies immigration control in Europe but a failed state and narcro-terrorism are completely different is a gigantic steaming pile of self contradictory horse shit.

                And you’re still going to die under a Trump administration as a welfare leeching piece of shit. LMAO!

                1. OK, kidnapping, with an ACTUAL LINK! Now that’s actually an argument, not mere name-calling!

                  In Mexico, they have strict gun control (for all except the thugs who ignore gun laws). You can be (and are) busted merely for accidentally carrying a few forgotten rounds of ammo in your glove box, at the border. And USA Government Almighty will jump on the bandwagon here, and confiscate your truck for dis-respecting Mexican laws, in such cases! But I digress…

                  If Mexican private citizens weren’t disarmed by Mexican Government Almighty, what do you think would happen to the rate of kidnappings?

                  You are confusing correlation with causation…

                  A really filthy-rich young punk has LOTS of girlfriends, even though he is literally filthy as well… He very rarely brushes his teeth or takes a bath! Are you going to say he has tons of girlfriends because of his bathless stench?

                  1. Note to foreign readers: as in banana republic dictatorships, even soi-disant libertarians use imaginary future premises to justify fallacious reasoning. If correlation did not converge on causation, all men would not be mortal.

                  2. Haha. Wait, what? “A really filthy rich young punk has LOTS of girlfriends”……

                    Envy is ugly, dude. And how does that have anything to do with the guilt trip you’re layin down? Who cares?

                    Haha. Wow.

                    1. Squirrely is just mad because being on the dole isn’t getting him any tail.

          2. This ^
            And that’s why I would favor a substantial but not unlimited amount of immigration from Mexico and points south. (while I would be screaming for a total end to all immigration that didn’t show an immediate economic benefit if I were in Europe)

            Now, that’s LEGAL immigration, and we need to do a better job of managing that. But hells yeah, compared to Somalis or f’ing Afghans, Mexicans and Hondurans are practically European*! What we shouldn’t have is OPEN FREAKING BORDERS, with or without the “Free medical! Free education!! Free welfare as long as you vote, vote, vote Democrat, the party Of FREE STUFF!”

            Thanx for the reminder, Shakia. Just saw my “re-subscription card” in with the bills. 20 years of respecting the magazine, down the shitter. I don’t need to pay for obsessive focus on an issue that’s basically “Libertarian principle doesn’t dictate that we should have a country anyway.”. I always got more smarmy “Think of the chiiiiildren!” than I needed from just the Left. I’ll pass on actually paying for it.

            *-note: NOT racist. It is discrimination, in that I prefer some brown people to other brown people. I also discriminate between steak and turdcakes. Thanks to Ilhana Omar for the early cross-the-bow reminder of why.

            1. I’m not sure what their demographic expectations are at Reason. They’re shitting on libertarianism pretty hard, but not ‘woke’ or Marxist enough to really appeal to progtards.

              I see them losing on both fronts. I certainly won’t domate or subscribe at this point. Nor will I refer people to this website, save for the occasional Stossel article. At least Stossel is consistently libertarian.

          3. By the end of Felipe Calderón’s administration (December 1, 2006 – November 30, 2012), the official death toll of the Mexican Drug War was at least 60,000.[40] Estimates set the death toll above 120,000 killed by 2013, not including 27,000 missing.[41][42]-wiki
            Not bad for a few drug-dealer punk small-timers. Bigger numbers than the French Revolution

            1. You can never import enough organized crime and associated murder and political assassination.

              #CulturalEnrichment

              1. Meh, he’s partially right. The Mafia didn’t have mich power in America until prohibition.

      1. The racist sqrsly believes only Hispanics come here illegally.

      2. When AOC was a twinkle in her grandfather’s eye, Lolita Lebrón and two guys walked into Congress and emptied three Lugers into the place without offing a single politician. After that and the assassination attempt on Truman, Puerto Ricans are considered the world’s worst shots. But hispanofascism, that is, Franco-Perón-Salazar-Pinochet-Chavez-Maduro lateran-treaty dictatorship is the general rule in all of Latin America, thanks to the Nixon Anti-Libertarian law exported there, along with shoot-first prohibitionism.

        1. Hank, you strike me as some shunned weirdo that mumbles and them giggles at his own bizarre jokes.

      3. Latin America is not as bad off as Islamic countries, but still worse than the US, as their voting with their feet testifies.

        Becoming more like Islamic countries makes America worse.
        Becoming more like Latin American countries makes America worse.

        America First.

      4. “That all must suffer and suffer alike”…….

        EVERYTHING IS SO TERRIBLE AND UNFAIR!!!! Haha.

        Go right for the guilt trip. Bravo. Start from the premise that their shitty life is somehow the responsibility of this country, and you don’t have to make sense! All the blame lies here! It’s like magic! Virtue signaling is so awesome!

        Haha

    2. Yeah, actually, the open borders in Europe are working out quite nicely. I was there recently and it’s nice to go between countries without anyone harrassing you. It’s called freedom. But I doubt you even have a passport.

      1. LMAO

        “I visited some tourist sites, you probably don’t even a passport you uncultured cretin. Ever heard of The Louvre? Yeah, didn’t think so.”

        Goddamn you’re fucking insecure.

      2. As long as you ignore all negative externalities there are not negative externalities. – chipper

      3. That seems like a tautology, Chipper.

      4. In order to lecture on 6 continents I did have to show my passport a few times.

        Movement within Europe is nice, but it’s the entry into Europe that is causing problems. Sweden and the U.K. have experienced rape gangs, France has had someone do something, Spain has had a train issue, among other deadly disturbances. If you haven’t seen the great cultural sites, go soon because they will disappear in time.

        1. Especially any sites related to Europes’ one-time “religion”. France has had 100s of church burnings…errr….”fire-related incidents” over the last decade. Good thing they don’t have religion-related arson too, or it’d be pretty hot over there.

          Another externality would be the damage to what they used to call a “free press”. I think the Yellow Vests mentioned something about that…anybody know what happened to THAT flash-in-the-pan movement?

      5. without anyone harrassing you
        Really? I hear the U-no-hoos are doing all the harassing nowadays. And if you complain government agents will harass your ass too.

      6. Ooh you’re so fucking sophisticated.

      7. I got quite the hassle at Schipol for a carbon fiber knee brace I wear because of recent knee repairs.

        That was in April.

        You were saying?

    3. I’m starting to think she is pro immigration. She might need another 20 articles covering the same points to suss it out

      1. You might be onto something there. It’s weird though, because I’d consider myself pro-immigration but whenever I read something by Shikha I find myself thinking “oh heavens, no! Not like that!”

        Unchecked passage of economic migrants who want to work find themselves instead herded into the inescapable welfare trap and illicit trade by “well-meaning” Democrats with their infinity social programs, prohibitionism, and regulatory zeal.

        1. “whenever I read something by Shikha I find myself thinking “oh heavens, no! Not like that!””

          Being pro sex doesn’t necessarily mean one is pro rape

      2. I’ll look for clues in the subtext!

    4. Precise legal terminology would be apropos. Even in a Heinlein novel, Health-Customs-Immigration inspect aliens on entry. Illegal aliens under US law are deported for first-offense uninspected entry, and for the more clerical reasons of overstaying an expired visa. Ayn Rand’s visa expired in 1929, and she and Frank crossed into Mexico and applied for re-entry. Is Shikha advocating uninspected entry? (In her country, crossing the Mason-Dixon Line of Control barbed-wire uninspected is often a body-bag offence.)

  3. I stopped reading at “SHIKHA DALMIA”.

    1. I still read every now and then. but just didn’t need to see her nonsense this morning.

    2. See what I mean? Why does Reason hire voter-alienators without so much as a convincing argument? The constitution orders The Don to see the laws are faithfully executed. We work to repeal plant leaf prohibition laws and thereby attract voters. But spitting on voters over Congress’ WAY looser border laws than those at the India-Pakistan border is hardly constructive or intelligent.

  4. I get it that some reporters here have an assigned beat, but is Shikha even capable of expanding her purview? I mean, ENB writes a lot about sex workers’ rights, but I’ve seen her cover a lot of other stuff. Robby is assigned to cover vapid young idiots and the jerks who coddle them, but those idiots come in so many variations and even genders, Robby never runs out fresh material.

    Shikha will never be like Nick, who can expound on any topic imaginable, but jeez, lady, try adding at least one or two more dead horses to the single one you constantly beat. That thing must be just pulp by now.

    1. You don’t enjoy reading the exact same article every week, followed by the exact same shouting match wherein all the Republicans on here get called racists xenophobes, and all the open borders people get thanked for supporting rapists and terrorism??

      Did you not like the movie groundhog day either?

      1. Nice. You got me laughing.

    2. An open borders immigration policy is the fundamental, non-negotiable principle of Koch / Reason libertarianism. And the US currently has an alt-right white nationalist President who’s running literal concentration camps. In this context, of course it’s appropriate for Reason to instruct its most talented writer to focus on immigration.

      #ImmigrationAboveAll

      PS — By the way, Shikha Dalmia recently submitted a devastating takedown of the worst Democratic Presidential candidate: Tulsi Gabbard Is Anti-War but Not Pro-Peace.

      #GabbardRussia

      1. #GabbardRussia

        The mortal, reflexive terror the left exhibits in the face of a relatively moderate Democrat is a sight to behold. These political hacks would make McCarthy blush. Biden has been chosen for them, and they just need to except that..

        1. Well, he’s supposedly a “parody” but actually his thing is to perpetuate and promote any smears of halfway-not terrible candidates, especially Gabbard. It doesn’t matter what pretence or context is used for posting it, just that he spam every comments section with the talking points.

        2. Prior to 5 years ago, most Democrats would have considered Tulsi a Democratic Socialist.

          Her “moderation” is that she doesn’t seem to hate America or white people.

      2. Search “Tulsi Gabbard surfing”.

        I want dat butt in the White House.

      3. Open Borders Uber Alles!

        Nick declares @Reason’s “core value” as Open Borders:
        In the 21st century, libertarians are going to have make common cause with the globalists of all parties, with the people whose core value is the right of individuals to move freely around the planet.

        Watching The Brink made me think that for all the other differences Reason has with the socialist magazine Jacobin, it may matter far more that we share a belief in open borders.

        https://reason.com/2019/04/12/steve-bannons-economic-nationalism-is-th/

      4. Wow, you really outdid yourself with this one (especially with the millennial “literal”). I’m awestruck.

    3. Dalmia is the token here.

      1. Ah balls accidental flag, sorry. Reason fox your damn website.

        1. *fix (or fuck)

    4. Seriously. She’s Tom Friedman without the bull shit awards.

      It’s tiresome stuff.

      Every time I read her screeds and I think, ‘yeh but Canada is pretty open but restrictive and no one seems to mind or think we’re racist’.

      On what planet do these people live to seemingly think illegal immigration is just an irritant and that Americans should see the ‘big open borders picture’?

      Are you a nation of laws or not?

      And Reason isn’t impressing me on this front.

      1. Haha. I recently heard that there are only 34 million people in Canada. One tenth of the US population.

        I’m thinkin’ give em a jacket and keep em headin north. A win-win!

        I’m sure Canada will be cool with that.

    5. Well, yeah, she also gives her opinion on the administration of India. Hey, it’s a very big place, lotsa folks.

    6. Boehm is almost as bad anymore.

    7. Look, Shiksa came in with the huddled masses and Liz is a lady of the night. Remember the adage: write what you know.

  5. Is this satire?

    1. Open borderism is satire yes. But just like how snopesncanr figure out Babylon bee is a satire site, some idiots can’t figure out open borders is nonsense.

    2. It wrong of Trump to call countries so riddled with crime and gang violence that people must flee them “shitholes”…because it is mean to state it that bluntly, I guess?

      1. But did you see how Biden covered up his poor kids/white kids gaffe by saying “I like all races, even the bad ones.”???

        Needless to say, the legacy media was all over his latest statement, generating several editorials and ‘think-pieces’ demanding that Trump resign.

        (stolen from the Babylon Bee. Could you tell it’s satire? It’s the familiar Onion formula, which still works.)

    3. There is the theory that Shikha is a mole in league with Ann Coulter to false flag libertarians as Open Borders loons.

      1. It’s almost easier to believe that than the fact she is a complete idiot lunatic, isn’t it?

        1. An idiot lunatic or someone pretending to be an idiot lunatic.

          Poe’s Corollary.

  6. Ya know, I used to enjoy Shikha’s commentary on other topics of interest to libertarians, but ever since Trump showed up, I can’t take the never-ending stream of immigration articles, which all seem to be generally the same theme.
    I’m not an anti-immigration person but being someone who doesn’t like being preached to about anything (Jesus, social-justice, immigration, whatever), it’s actually turning me off to the topic in general. I mean, how many different ways can one say, “Orange man bad”?

    1. 2 main ones. Markets imploding and everything is racist.

      1. Oh, you dropped this.. *Hands JesseAz Climate Change™ talking points*

        1. You know, you’re not wrong, but it has certainly taken a back seat to his list.

    2. You’ll need to get the approved list of “Trump Adjectives”, the “NYT Guide to Framing”, and the course outline related to the WaPo training booklet “Technically Not Journalism: Headling Writing As An Editorial Weapon”.

      Then, in any instance of something bad that cannot be connected to Trump at all, use “In the Trump Era” and “In Trump’s America”.

      LOTS of options!

    3. Haha. Are you suggesting that virtue signaling is overplaying it’s hand? Say it ain’t so!

  7. the tippy-top tier of foreigners

    The best kind.MAGA

  8. “At the time of this writing, Trump had backed away from the ultra-restrictionist RAISE Act, which would cut legal immigration by 40 percent by scrapping many family-based categories. In its stead, he embraced his son-in-law Jared Kushner’s reform plan, which would maintain current levels of immigration but reassign family-based visas to high-skilled foreigners in a bid to make America’s system more “merit-based.”

    And this is a bad thing….To invite and incentivize the best and brightest to come here? Really?!

    Seriously, I sometimes wonder if blind adherence to purity of ideology crowds out logic, reason and common-sense. The author of this hit piece lacks all three – a perfect Libtard Trifecta. It is not antithetical to libertarian thought to be discerning about who you let in. Far from it, we absolutely want to encourage the worlds best and brightest to come here and help build our on-going American Experiment.

    What we do need: Doctors, Physicists, Biologists, Engineers, etc
    What we do not need: Lawyers, landscapers, unskilled labor
    What we absolutely do not want: Illegal aliens, and immigrants who immediately suckle at the public teat upon arrival

    It is not wrong to be discerning about who comes here. A century ago, we needed unskilled labor. That is no longer the case. I’ve yet to read a compelling argument from Reason as to why we should not be more discerning. Not holding my breath.

    1. “What we do not need: Lawyers, landscapers, unskilled labor”

      You are probably right about the lawyers. But all the individuals and businesses in the US that keep hiring the landscapers and unskilled workers seem to disagree with your assessment.

      I’m gonna believe their assessment of our country’s labor needs over yours, sorry.

      1. All the individuals and business in China that keep hiring 10 year olds to reclaim rare earths from scrap electronics over open burn barrels seem to be more than happy with the situation. Imma have to believe their assessment because hurrr durrrrrrrrr.

        1. As libertarians are well known opponents of child labor and stalwart defenders of worker safety, I find your objection to be completely consistent with libertarian values and totally not just a convenient rhetorical brick to throw.

          1. We need to import more Chinese children. There are many monocles here in need of polishing.

            1. I’m sure your friends Buttplug agreed. Although he would use them to polish……..other things.

              And film it. Then post the links here.

          2. Why do you bother with the sockpuppets Tony?

            Also I’m not a libertarian and have never claimed to be. This is a particularly easy issue to reductio ad absurdum though particularly when Reason is all-in on social justice.

          3. Did you get your clock fixed tony?

            1. I’m not Tony, Jesse. Honestly, do you really find it so impossible that more than one person thinks you’re full of shit?

              1. Yes you are you outed yourself last week tony.

                1. Feeling a little dirty that you’ve reduced yourself to a fucking Tulpa clone? Projecting just a bit?

              2. Tony, you write exactly the same and you slipped up last week. Also, we’re not the stupid ones around here.

                But you’re too weak and stupid to understand that.

              3. How’s your gigantic clock you retarded faggot rube?

                1. I’m really not Esmeralda. But the more you gaggle of idiots get led around by the semi-feral Tulpa in his psychotic quest to turn a political forum into his own autistic shit-covered playpen, the more entertaining it gets for me.

                  1. Retarded one dimensional faggot rubes like you are a never ending source of entertainment.

                    1. By entertainment you mean blowjobs and fucking right? Does the shame add to the entertainment or detract?

      2. This is from the same group who doesnt think 1 million immigrants a year, not counting asylum or other entries, is enough for diversity.

        1. Jesse….I’ll be honest. Were it up to me, I would let in 10MM people per year, if they were highly skilled (e.g. physicians, physicists, biologists, programmers). We absolutely want the best and brightest of the world coming here. They are our future.

          We should open the immigration doors as wide as we can…for the people we want coming here.

      3. They hire foreign low skilled labor because it’s cheaper than domestic. It’s cheaper than domestic because we spend massive amounts of taxes to drive up the cost of domestic labor. That’s the system you defend.

        If we stopped importing cheap foreign labor, businesses would have to raise wages for these kinds of jobs and voters would have an incentive to change draconian regulations and taxation.

        1. If we stopped importing cheap foreign labor, businesses would have be forced to raise wages for these kinds of jobs and voters politicians would have an incentive to change increase draconian regulations and taxation.

          FIFY

          1. If we stopped importing cheap foreign labor, businesses would have be forced to raise wages for these kinds of jobs

            Correct: the market would force businesses to raise wages for these kinds of job. It would also force businesses to automate and improve the quality of jobs.

            Given that the mainstream argument for low skill immigration is mainly utilitarian (“it’s good for the economy”, “it makes avocados cheaper”), higher wages and better jobs through market forces is a good thing, isn’t it?

            and politicians would have an incentive to increase draconian regulations and taxation.

            You “fix” makes no sense. How does the availability of higher paying jobs incentivize politicians to increase regulations and taxation?

      4. They don’t want THOSE PEOPLE in partifcular, they just want the work done at 1/2X wage, so they can make Y+1/2X profit. I’m gonna believe they could stay in business paying X and making only Y, or Y+price increase.

        The people doing the work at 1/2X wage are not harder workers, or just by golly more appreciative of the little things, their labor is subsidized by the social safety net (paid for by others taxes) and employer savings on tax contribution (which are made up by others taxes).

        Their utility as fraudulent vote providers is pretty clear though.

        1. Trollificus

          “They don’t want THOSE PEOPLE in partifcular, they just want the work done at 1/2X wage”

          There is no such thing as 1/2 wage.

    2. And this is a bad thing….To invite and incentivize the best and brightest to come here? Really?!

      Think about it. Would this retarded cunt have been allowed to immigrate to America with a merit system?

    3. If I accepted your premise that the state has the legitimate authority to decide who comes and who goes, then of course I would advocate that the state would only pick the best and brightest.

      But I don’t accept your premise.

      1. No one cares what you think. You’re just a Canadian. And a pedophile.

        The American constitution says otherwise. As a Canadian, that probably confuses you.

      2. sorry chem….My view is you’re way off base here. Any sovereign nation has an inherent right (and obligation) to determine who will, or will not enter. Full stop.

        1. Jeff doesn’t think there should be sovereign nations.

          1. “Jeff doesn’t think there should be sovereign nations.”

            And he’s too much of a dishonest pussy to just own it

  9. The shocking excesses of Donald Trump’s America’s immigration policy. FTFY. Congress makes immigration laws, the President enforces them. Where is the Democrat controlled house’s new immigration law proposals? Who’s going to call out Congress? No one, that’s whom.

    1. The establishment prefers the status quo of “allowing” illegal immigration with the occasional raid to give the impression they’re “doing something”. Business not only gets they’re cheap labor, but the illegal immigrants can’t exactly complain about anything. The government gets their payroll taxes to keep up their pyramid schemes without ever owing them anything. The left and right both get to use them as ammunition in the never-ending culture wars. The immigrants are still better off than they were in the shit holes they came from.

      1. AlmightyJB, ya NAILED it nine ways to Sunday! Good job!

        “The government gets their payroll taxes to keep up their pyramid schemes without ever owing them anything.”

        Yes indeedy! See “The Truth About Undocumented Immigrants and Taxes” (in quotes) in your Google search window will take you straight there, hit number one… AKA http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/undocumented-immigrants-and-taxes/499604/ For details about us natives mooching off of the taxes of the illegal sub-humans…

        1. You have to be divorced from reality not to see the holes in The Atlantic story, or why Google is promoting it.

          1. Your logic and arguments are stupendously overwhelming!

            1. Ah, I see your problem: you incapable of distinguishing an opinion from a logical argument. No wonder you believe crap like that Atlantic article!

              1. Opinions are like assholes: EVERYONE has one!

                1. True but not very original.

                  In any case, the point remains: any halfway intelligent person should understand why the Atlantic article is b.s. It’s been explained here and elsewhere numerous times.

                  1. Lol. Debunked in the Reason comment section. I guess you showed him!

                    1. I didn’t show him; he can look it up for himself if he cares. There is not much point in having debates about the shape of the earth with a flat earther.

        2. Before I open it up…does it assume the employers of “undocumented workers” are reporting correctly and in full the wages paid to these employees? Coz if so, I could just read Shelton’s “Furry Freak Brothers” and gain as solid an understanding of the situation.

        3. Damn! If they’re propping us up, just think what they could do for their own countries! How dare we exploit them like that?

          Haha

    2. nice try but who not whom

      Ex Who is calling? Joe is calling.

      Whom is Joe calling? Joe is calling Eva.

      Who replaces a subject. Whom an object.

      1. That’s he or that’s him?

        1. Did you assume their gender???

        2. Similar subject/object distinction. Lucky we don’t have to speak Russian. These case distinctions that apply in English to pronouns, apply to nouns generally.

      2. Whom’s on First?

      3. They’re technically interchangeable. You’re describing an aesthetic preference not a rule.

    1. Exactly. Trump is slamming shut the Golden Door with his harsh rhetoric and policy proposals – almost none of which has had any more effect than any of the other blather that falls out of his face. Trump has not in fact built a great big beautiful wall, nor has he settled North Korea’s hash, won any good and easily-winnable trade wars, paid off any part of the national debt, ended our involvement in unwinnable foreign wars we have no business being involved in, restored prosperity to the Rust Belt, and nobody’s been getting sick of all the winning. His only major accomplishment has been keeping Hillary Clinton out of the White House (not that that’s anything to sneeze at, it’s more than anybody else could accomplish and probably saved this country from the greatest disaster since Vietnam) but most of the rest of his accomplishments are simply fantastic. Literally fantastic.

      1. Yes, He HAS been successful at making the liberals cry!!! That’s GREAT in the eyes of conservatives!!! Of course, the liberals want to make the conservatives cry as well… It is THE top-drawer high-selling motivation, these days, is to make our enemies cry… Soon, we can ALL cry! Here is my prediction:

        2020: National debt = 120% of GNP. Donald Trump easily wins re-election by promising a large budget for a new Department of Disputing Elizabeth Warren’s Native American Ancestry, and for Making the Liberals Cry.

        2024: National debt = 130% of GNP. Elizabeth Warren is elected POTUS; She promised a large budget for a new Department for Making the GOP-tards Cry. Elon Musk’s projects are fabulously successful, and Americans are emigrating en masse to Mars. Given the choice of either continuing to pay hideously large fees to the USA IRS, or renouncing America citizenship, the Martians pay $15,000 each to renounce America citizenship, but even the millions of Martian-American exit fees are like micro-farts in a hurricane… They make no difference in the national debt!

        2028: National debt = 150% of GNP. New POTUS Bernie Sanders wins by promising free health care and PhD educations for everyone who can spell the word “free”, plus, a free pony for everyone under 15 years of age. Some USA states are getting ready to split off of the USA, and renounce their “fair” share of the USA debt. Hispanic illegal humans are scrambling for the exits back south, as most employable Americans seek black-market low-wage jobs to escape exorbitant taxes.

        2032: National debt = 230% of GNP. All states have split off of the USA, leaving behind only Washington, DC, with the entire national debt. DC promptly declares bankruptcy. All states with nuclear-weapons bases, having very well learned from Ukraine having given up its share of USSR nukes, and getting invaded by Russia later on, have kept their own nukes.

        2036: Montana and Wyoming unite, feeling a patriotic urge to restore the united USA towards its former fully Glory Days. In a quest for military glory, they have a full-scale nuclear exchange with California. The USA’s needs have now been met: Both the liberals AND the conservatives are forced to cry!

        1. Is this where sqrsly claims only the executive has a hand in government spending?

        2. He HAS been successful at making the liberals cry!!!

          That’s a rather low bar, as it doesn’t seem to take much. Orange man’s physical existence alone seems to suffice.. I believe that, not unlike Sampson, his strength is in his hair..

        3. Oh man. I wouldn’t want to lose Montana. Although…I’m thinking that California would just get nuked while they were looking for a city to target in Montana.

          “What’s this? Bozeman? It’s kind of like a suburb…with a school in it. Keep looking! Billings? That’s a bigger dot on the map anyway…”

          BOOM

  10. Scott Warren, an Arizona State University professor and volunteer at No More Deaths, a group that leaves food and water in the desert for exhausted migrants, is facing 20 years in prison on two sets of charges: harboring, because he admitted two migrants into a makeshift desert medical shelter to administer first aid, and trespassing, because the area where he did so is a federally protected wilderness that he did not have a permit to enter.

    Emphasis added. Nothing for littering?

    1. The day is coming, when, if you open a door or press an elevator button for the benefit of another person, if you do NOT ask them for “papers please”, first, and they turn out to be an illegal sub-human, you will be arrested for “aiding and abetting” crime!

      1. “Sub-human” is how you look at everybody who disagrees with you.

      2. You really are an idiot.

    2. makeshift desert medical shelter, :words: and trespassing, because the area where he did so is a federally protected wilderness

      I guess, technically, constructing a makeshift desert medical shelter on federally protected wilderness could be construed as ‘littering’, if that’s of any comfort..

      1. Here’s a more-ridiculous example of criminalizing simple human decency.

        https://reason.com/2019/05/20/a-texas-attorney-was-arrested-and-detained-for-helping-three-young-migrants-on-the-side-of-the-road/
        A Texas City Attorney Was Arrested and Detained for Helping Three Young Migrants on the Side of the Road
        One of the migrants was gravely ill.

        If Jesus Christ was alive today, and fed (“fishes and loaves”) 5,000 people, w/o demanding “papers please”, first, Jesus would be serving time in the slammer for that…

        1. Spoiler alert! Jesus was crucified.

          1. Meh.. he got over it..

            1. True. While being crucified was indeed fatal, it triggered Jesus’ first regeneration. Where he became the second Jesus. After which he left earth to travel time and space. Battling aliens and communists throughout eternity, even the Clintons are amongst his rogues gallery.

              1. Is it true he had a light saber and rode a dinosaur? I’m pretty sure I heard something about “The Raptor” in there somewhere.

            2. Good thing he didn’t get life without parole.

  11. I am not a fan of Trump often but his stance of Illegal Immigration is spot on. Illegals cost the US at a minimum 200 Billion a year (that would be a trillion every five for those who cannot do math), they take jobs and, most damaging, Depress Wages. Why do Food Processors, Construction, and low skilled labor jobs pay so little? Because Illegals take these job. Rich Californians love them in their State because they get their house Keeping and yard work at below market rates. EVEN TRUMPS idea about Legal Immigration is a good idea, that you need to be able to support yourself (ya, you should not have come here for benefits that you never paid in to). Where I live in North Carolina we have old Mill Towns full of people on welfare and then we have the whole construction industry filled with Hispanics and not only the LOW SKILLED JOBS these days. We do not have the money to continue to take in MILLIONS of people in to our country illegal each year…

    1. The collective hive mandated WAY too many licenses, before we’re allowed to earn an honest living… Put too many of us into poverty. To “help” with this poverty problem that The Collective Hive created, The Collective Hive gave us welfare. Welfare then attracts too many illegal sub-humans, sometimes, so to fix THAT problem, The Collective Hive now wants e-verify and giant border walls and giant border armies… And now also property confiscations for wall-building… So I suppose The Collective Hive will next fire up the military draft to fix THAT problem! (Lack of a large enough wall-and-army forces).
      When will we stop the perpetual cycle of Government Almighty always getting bigger, to fix the LAST batch of problems created by excessive Government Almighty?

      1. P it really addressing his point are you? This is typical of your scattered tiny mind.

    2. How often do we hear from politicians or political candidates (besides crazy un-electable Libertarians): “Please give me and my kind LESS power, and we will thus solve your troubles for you”?

      No, the politicians nearly always demand MORE power, so as to “help” us solve our problems! Border wars are just one more example of this.

    3. What a great anecdotal story that means absolutely nothing and only contributes to idiocy.

      Thank you for that!

      In the future actually attempt to provide information that would back up your claims.

      Dear god…immigrants should support themselves…wow.

  12. America’s Golden Door Is Slamming Shut

    And that’s the best fucking news I’ve heard all day.

    1. I wasn’t even aware that we had a golden door but if it’s open it should be closed. We don’t live in a fucking barn.

  13. For Libertarians it’s a point of pride that they completely ignore, or have open contempt for, the concerns of the average voter. In the mind of the average Reason writer populism is a vulgar, dirty word that is tantamount to profanity.

    While this stokes their elitist egos and confirms their visions of their own intellectual superiority, it does leave them totally unprepared when it comes to changes in the winds of popular sentiment — unless that sentiment happens to coincide with their preconceived notions of what people think, e.g., Gillespie’s “libertarian moments” that pop up every now and then.

    So it is with illegal immigration. While the post-Cold War economic arrangement of open markets and open borders has been quite lucrative for the educated classes, big businesses, and entrepreneurs, it hasn’t been so hot for the middle and working classes. Trump is living proof of this.

    The truth is there is no groundswell of popular support for illegal immigration outside of those groups who benefit from it, and even when Trump leaves office there will be no amnesty, no abolition of ICE, no liberalization of refugee entry, no “libertarian moment” on immigration whatsoever.

    Reasonoids like Shikha, who views the average American with the same disdain she holds for the Dalit, will be quick to dismiss this as latent racism bubbling to the surface, the sound of the Death Rattle of White Supremacy. In reality, Americans of all races are sick of illegal immigration, and hucksters like Trump are benefiting from the refusal of “respectable” politicians to do anything about it.

    As the saying goes, if “mainstream” candidates refuse to solve the problem, voters will look outside the mainstream for someone who will. Which is how we got Trump in the first place.

    1. Americans of all races are sick of illegal immigration,

      Odd.. no one ever seems to ask where these illegal immigrants end up living, how the impact of their cultural differences effect those they refuse to integrate with, and what the response of the often poor and relatively powerless (politically) is to being displaced and replaced by newly imported communities.

      1. That’s the biggie.

        These people who demand these policies don’t have to deal with them.

        Not in the US. Not in Europe. The people who DO have to deal with it get angry while the people who champion the policies just look at them like bigots and not like people who are forced to deal with a problem a collection of moronic elites caused.

        1. In Europe, the people most approving of massive immigration live almost exclusively in areas where they are least likely to be gang culturally-enriched. Go figure.

  14. I didn’t read the article. Just dropping by to say Shikha is a moron.

    1. That’s implied by the byline.

    2. I started to, so I could do a thorough line-by-line takedown of all her lies, exaggerations, false equivalences, and biased suppositions, but I was exhausted by the middle of paragraph 2 and quit.

      1. I was going to refute Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, but I found it so tiresome and idiotic, I just threw in the towel! It’s not worth it! But take my good word for it!

        1. You’re comparing Shiktard to Einstein?

          1. OK then, I was going to refute Martin Luther King Jr.’s “dream” of having people being judged by the content of their character… But then I decided that’s so obviously crazy that I can’t be bothered to refute it. TAKE MY GOOD WORD FOR IT is the essence of my argument, and ALL should bow before it!

            1. You really like to showcase your endless stupidity, don’t you?

            2. So now Shikha’s as good as both Einstein and MLK?

              Nobody should just take your word for something like that. With writing that good they should read it, start to finish, right fucking now!

    3. Dropped by to observe that Shakia’s an idiot, stayed for the Libertarian purity posts.

  15. Shikha, take it from an actual immigrant: except for illegals and hangers on like you, merit based immigration has been difficult for a long time. And of course it’s telling that you please this in terms of wealth.

    If America’s golden doors shut now, they are shutting for people like you. Good.

  16. So we’re supposed to let in every poor person in the world? Does she know they’re supposed to apply for asylum in the first country they get to not travel through 3 or 4 before illegally entering the US and then apply?

    1. Asylees apply for protected status inside the US. Refugees apply outside the US.

  17. Another article written by a woke millennial who slept through history class. It’s pathetic, and frankly it is disgusting,

    1. I read my history… The TRULY more-native American mega-fauna resented the hell out of it when the invasive “Native” American humans first got here, and started driving the ice-ages megafauna extinct. The megafauna issued NO papers and NO permissions to the invaders!!!

      “Native” American humans then over time apparently became “native”, even though the now-extinct megafauna has wished that “they would all go back to where they came from”.

      Then NEW invader-humans from Europe arrived (again, no papers, no invitations).

      If we’re consistent in our beliefs here, we would demand that European invaders should “all go back to where they came from”!

      1. If we are smart and learn from history, however, we don’t repeat their mistakes.

        1. Yes, the Native Americans SHOULD have killed every European invader before they ever hit the beaches!

          1. Well.. Probably, but that statement implies that the Native Americans were a monolithic group, unified in their feelings towards European invaders, and had the technological, naval, and military prowess to do such a thing. Unfortunately for them, they lacked these prerequisites, and were often engaged in protracted tribal conflicts with their neighbors , and were more than willing to enlist the aid of those European invaders in order to tip the scales in their own regional conflicts.. still are to this day, via the U.S. government, to a certain extent. Hindsight is 20/20 here?

          2. Yes, the Native Americans SHOULD have killed every European invader before they ever hit the beaches!

            I’m not quite sure what you are asking.

            (1) I think any population certainly has a moral and legal right to repel invaders, if necessary with deadly force.

            (2) Furthermore, the consequence of their failure to repel European invaders was loss of control of the Americas. I don’t think Native Americans deserved to lose control of the Americas.

            So, which is it? Do you disagree with (1) or do you disagree with (2)? If you disagree with neither, it seems to me that you agree that naive Americans should have kept Europeans off their soil, if necessary with deadly force.

            1. There’s another choice available to all of us: We could all agree to be humans, and that all humans should treat each other the way that we’d like to be treated… Not scapegoating the Jews to get ahead politically, and not scapegoating the illegal sub-humans to get ahead politically. Can we try THAT for once?

              1. Some of us don’t like communism.

              2. There’s another choice available to all of us: We could all agree to be humans, and that all humans should treat each other the way that we’d like to be treated

                I fully agree. What does that mean? I respect the laws of this country and of other countries, including immigration laws, and I expect others to do the same. I expect to be thrown in jail and/or deported when I break laws, including immigration laws, and I expect other people to face the same consequences.

                Mind you: I came to the US as an immigrant fleeing oppression. I never for a moment believed that I was entitled to living in the US or that Americans were under any obligation to let me into the country, provide me with medical care, or give me an education.

                Yours are the absurd beliefs of virtue-signaling, ignorant American leftists, people intent on turning the US into the same kind of oppressive authoritarian state that I emigrated from. No. Way.

                1. Not all laws are worthy of respect. Democracy is often immoral and unethical. To wit in the USA’s history: Forced re-location of law-abiding and peaceful Native Americans like the Cherokee, concentration camps for Japanese-Americans, slavery for black folks. “Jim Crow” laws, no votes for women, and on and on… The scapegoating of illegal sub-humans will eventually be seen to fall into the same category, fair and square.

                  Government Almighty making my charity choices for me as a taxpayer? Same category, yes! SOOO many issues to tackle!

                  1. You just can’t make up your mind? You said “let’s apply the Golden Rule”. As an immigrant I agreed: I respect national borders and I expect other to do the same.

                    We don’t have to wait for the future to see you for what you are because your type has been around for a couple of centuries: you’re a useful fool for people who destroy liberal democracies. The only thing people like you bring about is chaos, destruction, and abject poverty.

                    1. Lawbreakers are just Government-Almighty-Damned, evil, destructive fools? Like NAZI-era Germans who disobeyed evil laws and hid Jews from the NAZIs? Like American bus operators who, once every while, when no one was looking, allowed black people to sit in the front of the bus? In the Deep South some mere few decades ago? Now, those of us who refuse to hate illegal sub-humans, are a hazard to civilized life? Yes, all of us law-breakers are total SCUM in the eyes of the Righteous Folks!

                    2. SQRLSY One, let me say it again: if self righteous ignorant leftists like you win this political debate, I’m leaving this country. I experienced the king of totalitarianism and destruction you create once before and I’m not willing to live through it again.

              3. There’s another choice available to all of us: We could all agree to be humans, and that all humans should treat each other the way that we’d like to be treated

                As your own three examples (and many others from history) show: if you don’t repel invaders, your civilization gets destroyed.

                So you are saying that we should make the choice to destroy our civilization?

                1. Hordes of ideologically blinded Islamofascists, sadly, can start to fit the bill for that… I do pity Europeans who have to deal with that v/s trying to be nice to suffering fellow humans!

                  We don’t face that kind of challenge here in the USA… No Hispanifascists have threatened to go rioting because some cartoonist offended them, over here! No Hispanifascist ideology-driven suicide bombings that I have EVER heard of, have happened over here! Some of them would like to mow my yard for me at an affordable price, or wipe my baby’s butt, and I don’t feel horribly threatened by that.

                  1. What makes you think Islamofascists aren’t coming in through the Mexican border? Many people coming in from Mexico come from Africa and the Middle East.

                    But the South American are bad enough: many of them are either victims of gang members (and their indentured servants), or are gang members themselves. And even the ones who are not involved with gangs are going to be a burden on US tax payers for generations to come.

                    The fact that you are too naive to see it doesn’t change that.

                    1. Show us, on the doll, WHERE did the illegal sub-humans touch you, in a bad way?

                    2. I have nothing against Mexicans or illegal immigrants. They are victims of people like you a much as everybody else. It’s you who is evil and selfish.

              4. “that all humans should treat each other the way that we’d like to be treated”

                So you want to be stupidly called Satan?

                Lolololol

  18. Agree overall, but a couple of minor points from a business immigration attorney:

    1. Since at least 2008, USCIS has required submission of the full set of paperwork for H-1B extensions. That’s not new. Also, the purpose of submitting that paperwork is not to ensure no H-1B workers are displacing American workers. USCIS doesn’t look at that issue very closely until someone gets to the green card process (and even then, DOL is the one scrutinizing the potential displacement). Most of the challenges to the H-1B petitions deal with the definition of speciality occupation and whether or not a degree is actually required. I have neither seen nor heard of a Request for Evidence on an H-1B demanding evidence that no American workers were displaced.

    2. I am a great admirer of Ayaan Hirsi-Ali. It’s dismissive to describe her as a “conservative darling.” Her policy positions are almost all significantly to the left of center. Furthermore, I’m not at all sure your statement that she would not have been able to enter is true. She didn’t come to the US from Somalia claiming domestic violence-based asylum. She had been a member of the Dutch parliament who was targeted by a group of radical Muslims. Her life was under constant threat. She required bodyguards and had a safe room in her home, which she had to use more than once. She came here from there and was openly persecuted by a group that has made good on threats of death regularly. Her claim was not based on typical gang violence or domestic violence.

    The horrors perpetrated by the Trump administration at the border are shocking, but we cannot afford to be lazy when we make our arguments. The entire article loses some credibility when it contains a couple of mistakes like these. And the snark directed at a woman who survived circumcision, forced marriage, and being targeted and marked for death by religious fanatics made me cringe.

    1. I dont know that I have ever noticed you post before (I could have just missed it).

      All the same… could YOU write these articles instead of Dalmia?

      I may still disagree with the article but at least you seem to be knowledgeable and of a sober mind rather than simply repeating oft disproved shrieks.

    2. Thanks Lady Dada for writing FAR more sensibly than a BUNCH of shitposters here!

      Here’s the full out-take from Shikha:

      “Meanwhile, the administration has narrowed the eligibility criteria for asylum so that people who flee their home countries due to gang or domestic violence are disqualified. If she had arrived under the new guidance, the conservative darling Ayaan Hirsi Ali—a Somali immigrant who was the victim of genital mutilation by her Muslim family—wouldn’t have been able to get into America.”

      Poor word choice, probably, yes… “Conservative darling” though only because American (Christian or pseudo-Christian) conservative s LOVE to slam ALL Islamic folk together, and slam them ALL, one and the same, is what I think I hear Shihka saying. Certainly in context, Shikha might be saying something along the lines of this: “Don’t just be trotting out the likes of Ayaan when it suits your narrative of slamming ALL Islamic folks, indiscriminately! Trot her out ALSO when we are talking of the indiscriminately BLIND anti-immigrant nature of the Trump Administration, who wants to ideally hear of NO cases of asylum, whatsoever”!

      1. Meanwhile, the administration has narrowed the eligibility criteria for asylum so that people who flee their home countries due to gang or domestic violence are disqualified. If she had arrived under the new guidance, the conservative darling Ayaan Hirsi Ali—a Somali immigrant who was the victim of genital mutilation by her Muslim family—wouldn’t have been able to get into America.

        That’s incorrect; the reason is that people of public interest, with special skills, or international fame, can always be admitted.

        However, the US cannot, and should not, make admissible every person who is the victim of gang violence or family violence. That’s not only numerically impossible, many of those victims will themselves also be perpetrators of the very same ills they demand admission for.

    3. Trump’s policies and actions on our border are terrific. Opposing them is opposition to our sovereign borders, and the rule of law. Which is a horrific position for an attorney to take.

    4. The ‘conservative darling’ comment is derogative and shows how women treat other women badly especially, in the professional arena, but that’s another topic. It’s a perfect example though how Reason is complicit in having Shikha publish articles devoid of integrity and truth.

    5. Lady Dada, great points and well written. I came here from the Netherlands, where a politician was murdered by a far left animal rights activist, and a filmmaker was stabbed by a third generation Muslim immigrant for a 10 min film called Submission. Ayaan had written the script.

    6. Ayaan Hirsi-Ali’s is a great thinker and professional writer, she should be employed at Reason, not Shikha. Ayaan’s husband is Niall Ferguson. For actual intellectual and reasonable immigration policy coverage, see Cato Institute: https://www.cato.org/tags/immigration

  19. Wow this was one of the most uninformed articles I have read here in a long time. I can see Shikha got ripped a new one in the above comments. When did Reason become an arm of the Democratic Party machine?

    1. Happened over a year or two. Right about the time I stopped subscribing. They’re basically a single-issue mag now.

  20. Shirka Dirka Muhammad Jihad!

  21. Endorsing a tacit open borders policy of selective non enforcement of immigration law and calling anyone who objected nativists and possibly racists got you Trump. Ignoring and denigrating the moderate concerns of significant portion of th he electorate got you an immoderate president who does revels in your disgust. Congratulations.

    1. And, you know, I was kind of ambivalent about Trump and didn’t vote for him. Turns out, he’s mostly just a middle of the road kind of politicians who happens to be able to do some verbal jiu-jitsu to get his opponents to reveal their agenda and incriminate themselves.

      The current crop of Democratic contenders and people like Shikha are convincing me that he’s pretty much the only choice in 2020.

    2. By calling anything that isn’t your radical anti-human policy “open borders,” you give yourself room to become ever more radical.

      Stop being a racist cunt.

      1. Throwing about foul names is all you have, is it not?

      2. Takes one to know one.

        Progressives are the masters of projection on race.

      3. Tony, you’re probably the most racist person to post here. You really should kill yourself.

        1. Said no pageant staffer to no underaged pageant contestant ever.

          1. It’s interesting how you resort to slander when your argument is weak.

            It wouldn’t be bad if it was at least funny and not incredibly derivative.

            1. So you get to joke about Obama being born in Africa (ha ha!) but I can’t comment on Trump’s documented skeevy behavior backstage at his pageants?

              Do you really think this is going to end well for him?

              1. “So you get to joke about Obama being born in Africa”

                I’ve never done that. Why are you such a hysterical faggot?

                Why is literally everyone a caricature that lives in your idiot mind?

                Your argument got destroyed. If you’re going to whine about it, at least be funny.

                1. Points at Tulpa’s dick. The crowd seems to think it’s the best joke of the night.

                  1. God damn how many times are you going to be so sad and derivative before you get that you’re sadly derivative?

                    YOU – “GIGANTIC CLOCKS!!!”

                    Sure sure, you constantly overcompensate because you’re small, we got that years ago.

                    It was never funny. Now it’s not funny and sad.

                    1. I have a clock on my computers, my phone, my oven, and my microwave. Those are the only clocks I have.

                  2. Is it as big as your gigantic clock, you retarded faggot?

              2. “Do you really think this is going to end well for him?”
                He’s currently the single most powerful person on earth. How do you think it’s going to end?

      4. If you advocate letting people in because of economic conditions in their home countries or because of gang violence or family violence, you are objectively for “open borders”.

        And, Tony, let’s be clear: it is you who is advocating “radical anti-human policies”, because the policies you advocate are causing widespread misery and death.

      5. radical anti-human policy

        Prog-Rock band name?

    3. Are there any downsides to strict border enforcement? Any at all?

      1. It’s expensive. But it’s necessary.

        1. What are the costs that you perceive arising from strict border security?

          1. I just answered that.

            1. You said “it’s expensive” without mentioning what were the expenses that you perceived as most significant.

              There’s expense in terms of lost money (via taxation), expense in terms of lost productivity (via regulation), and expense in terms of lost liberty (via restrictions on our freedoms). Not all mutually exclusive of course.

              Which of these do you regard as most significance in terms of expense?

              1. Pedo Jeffy, why should we waste time answering your Canadian questions? All you want is to import pedophiles like yourself here anyway. No !arrican child should go unraped, right Pedo Jeffy?

              2. No, I wasn’t talking about any of that crap. I thought it was obvious that I was talking about the actual expenses of border and immigration enforcement. Proper border and immigration enforcement need not cause any loss of productivity or tax revenue as long as we have an orderly system for legally employing foreign workers. And of course, the argument that we would suffer “lost liberty” as a result of maintaining our sovereignty is bullshit, since open borders would ultimately result in a catastrophic loss of liberty and prosperity. As I said, border and immigration enforcement is costly but necessary.

                1. Oh. So you think expenses are only measured in dollars?

                  If you lose your liberty to conduct your life as you see fit, isn’t that a cost that ought to be considered in the cost-benefit analysis?

                  Proper border and immigration enforcement need not cause any loss of productivity or tax revenue as long as we have an orderly system for legally employing foreign workers.

                  How is this possible? This is wishful thinking. Right now, employers must submit I-9 forms to prove that their employees are legit. This is an added expense and burden on every employer. Right now, a great number of employers are required to use E-Verify. Again this is an expense that employers must suffer due to immigration restrictions.

                  And of course, the argument that we would suffer “lost liberty” as a result of maintaining our sovereignty is bullshit

                  So you do not regard freedom of association to be a legitimate liberty?

                  1. If you wish to converse with me, you will have to respond to what I actually say rather than telling me what I think.

                    1. I am responding to what you say. You say “it’s expensive” but then you don’t fully appreciate the costs. You seem to believe that the benefits are worth the cost of strict border security, but I believe that you are underestimating the costs. If you do believe the benefits are worth the costs, wouldn’t it be helpful to have a full accounting of both the benefits and the costs?

                      Also, you snuck in a false equivalence between “open borders” and “lack of sovereignty”. The two are not equal.

                    2. “I am responding to what you say.”

                      No you aren’t. It’s your signature move, and when it happens, you storm off when people tell you about it.

                      You – ” you’re a troll and aren’t interested in serious debate because you won’t allow me to mischaracterize your statements. ”

                      It’s literally called chemjeffing

                  2. If you lose your liberty to conduct your life as you see fit, isn’t that a cost that ought to be considered in the cost-benefit analysis

                    Sure. And the “loss of my liberty” from letting in millions of low skill workers is very high under our current form of government. Hence I vote against it.

                    1. With open borders, we would be inundated with hoards of people unfit even for low skilled work in this country.

      2. I don’t think so.

        You keep the integrity of your laws in tact.

        If you want to be more ‘open’ change the laws.

        But having unenforced laws shouldn’t be an option. For ANY nation.

        1. “But having unenforced laws shouldn’t be an option. For ANY nation.”

          In the past, that’s why women weren’t allowed to vote, many blacks were slaves and “slave thieves” (who set them free) were punished, Native Americans were hounded nearly out of existence, Japanese-Americans were sent to concentration camps, and on and on. Why don’t we GET RID of unjust laws? In the interim… Is it NOT heroic to IGNORE unjust laws? (“You blacks get back in the back of the busses!!!” was otherwise totally justified).

          1. You’re conflating “ignoring unjust laws” with “not enforcing unjust laws”.

            Under the rule of law, all laws should be enforced by government because (in a democracy) all laws were enacted by the people.

            As an individual, you should ignore unjust laws. That is heroic precisely because they are unjust and because your choice has consequences. That way, your choice to ignore unjust laws and your willingness to suffer personally is what gets laws changed.

            For you to advocate that government should simply not enforce laws you consider unjust, however, is not “heroic”, it’s empty virtue signaling and an attack on the rule of law.

        2. So your claim is that there are no downsides whatsoever to strict border security?

          How about money to pay the border agents? Where does that come from? Isn’t that a downside – having to tax people to pay for that?

          1. Yes, people who think like you have cost Americans much. Now stay out of our business you Canuck piece of shit.

            1. Oh good heavens.
              I’m not Canadian, but you are a pest. Shoo.

              1. Nigga, how fucking stupid are you that you think you get to tell anyone anything.

  22. At the time of this writing, Trump had backed away from the ultra-restrictionist RAISE Act, which would cut legal immigration by 40 percent by scrapping many family-based categories. In its stead, he embraced his son-in-law Jared Kushner’s reform plan, which would maintain current levels of immigration but reassign family-based visas to high-skilled foreigners in a bid to make America’s system more “merit-based.”

    So you are saying that “America’s golden doors” aren’t actually shutting at all. Instead, America will let people in who deserve to come in, as opposed to the current system based on nepotism and corruption. This is bad… how?

  23. Silly. There is no limit to the amount of government oppression that is permitted in this situation. This is a libertarian site!

    1. If they had any scruples, they would be anarchists, but they’re not, and that makes libertarians Nazis.

      1. It’s just that their prime directive of reducing the size and scope of government not only doesn’t apply in certain select situations, they feel free to indeed go full Hazi as long as it’s in their narrow scope of what government can do.

        It’s almost like a completely bankrupt philosophy that only hangs onto its last few breaths because, even as a moral and logical shitshow, it’s still better than what Republicanism has become, and they need all the philosophical lipstick on the pig that it can get.

          1. Your clinical paranoia is becoming a burden to other people.

            1. What does that have to do with the fact that you fell for a parody Esmeralda.

                1. And what does THAT have to do with the fact that you fell for a parody Esmeralda.

        1. doesn’t apply in certain select situations

          The federal government has the authority to enforce the national border. The end.

    2. This is a libertarian site!

      But this isn’t a libertarian country, it’s a constitutional republic and a democracy.

      We can debate about how you want to change laws pertaining to immigration and executive power to make things more libertarian. However, simply proposing that the executive ignore the law in order to bring about a result you want is not a libertarian proposal.

      1. Libertarians do almost nothing but jack off to fantasy world scenarios.

        Why are you pragmatists all of a sudden whenever it comes to the federal government torturing, caging, and deporting brown people?

        Curiouser and curiouser!

        1. Why are you pragmatists all of a sudden

          Have I ever been anything other than a pragmatist? I have been crystal clear that I obey US laws and expect others to do the same, whether I agree with those laws or not; I expect people who want to change things to go through the legislative process; and I have been crystal clear that should the US adopt self-destructive socialist policies, I’ll emigrate again. The fact that I have a preference for libertarian policies is secondary to my pragmatism.

          whenever it comes to the federal government torturing, caging, and deporting brown people?

          You’re merely projecting your own racist beliefs onto others, Tony.

          1. Well I don’t know who you are, but I would bet a lot of money that you’ve incidentally broken more serious laws driving on the highway than the minor infraction that is unlawful presence.

            1. “Well I don’t know who you are,”

              And yet you’ll stupidly speculate.

            2. Well, I may have driven around unwittingly with a broken taillight. It’s not a very serious infraction as far as the law goes. But I am required by law to fix it. Likewise, parking my car in an illegal location is not a serious infraction by itself, but the car will get towed and impounded. That’s usually more expensive than the ticket, but it’s not a punishment.

              Likewise, illegal presence in the US is not necessarily a serious infraction per se, but the illegal condition must be remedied. It is remedied by voluntary departure, deportation, and detention, as necessary. Those aren’t punishments, they exist to restore a legal condition.

              Hope that clears up your confusion about how illegal presence in the US can be treated as a “minor infraction”, yet still result in deportation.

              Note that if you deliberately and repeatedly engage in “minor infractions”, the penalties escalate, as they should.

        2. “Libertarians do almost nothing but jack off to fantasy world scenarios.

          Why are you pragmatists all of a sudden”

          Make up your fucking mind you whiny fuck.

        3. Why are you pragmatists all of a sudden

          Almost daily, I’m on here telling privileged fantasizers fuck you, no, we’re not putting our country in a suicide pact with libertarian doctrinal purity.

    3. “This is a libertarian site!”

      And yet here you are.

      1. Here I am, believer in huge levels of taxing and spending, the most libertarian person here.

      2. So WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU COMPLAINING ABOUT ESMERALDA.

        YOU ARE HERE. ERGO, PEOPLE WITH BELIEFS OTHER THAN STRICT LIBERTARIANISM ARE HERE.

        WHAT THE FUCK REQUIRES YOU TO COSTANTLY MOAN AND WHINE OUT THE STUPID STATEMENT “This is a Libertarian site?”

        1. You don’t think it’s odd that the very openly progressive regular here agrees with the articles more often than the majority of the other commenters?

          1. I find it odd that you find it necessary to bitch about something that as an observation is punctured by reality.

            Reason has taken on a prog bent. You just admitted it.

            1. Or dirty libertarian peasants have joined the Trump cult. You admit it every time you mash your dumb face against your keyboard.

              1. Except then you, as a prog, STILL WOULDN’T ALIGN AS CLOSELY TO REASON as you now admit you do.

                You really didn’t think this through fucko.

                1. (this is when it dawns on Esmeralda that I am correct, and he inadvertently fucked up and clowned himself)

                  1. You’re as good at reading people as you are at making a fool of yourself.

                  2. How’s your gigantic clock, Esmerelda, you retarded faggot?

          2. That’s no mystery. It’s because Reason is a magazine by people who are both intellectuals and nominally libertarians. The self-interest of intellectuals overrides their generally libertarian outlook.

  24. America’s Golden Door Is Slamming Shut

    The headline is very on point.

    That’s what invaders like Dalmia think entrance to the US is: a golden door that they can exploit for their own economic prosperity, and they have the gall to act like they are entitled to pass through that door.

    Build your own damn prosperous country.

    1. I’ve never heard that America has a golden door. It sounds very asian. I would think if anyone were going to build America a golden door, it would be Trump and it would be huge. Also, the whole point of building doors is so they can close. Otherwise, just build an arbor or pergola.

  25. Another rousing meeting of Libertarians For Authoritarian, Cruel, Bigoted Immigration Policies And Practices.

    (Where libertarians = slack-jawed, to-be-replaced, right-wing malcontents)

    Carry on, clingers. So far as culture war casualties could carry anything in modern America, that is.

    1. You’re going to die as a useless old piece of shit welfare leech under a Trump administration Hihn. LMAO!!!!!

      1. Have we determined how that RAKL is actually Hihn? Is he actually capable of restraining his caps key in one of his multiple personalities?

        1. He isn’t Hihn. Hihn has no self control and always outs himself. Also, Arty was a longtime poster for Volokh’s articles before they were relocated to Reason.

    2. You should put that on your tombstone.

      1. Open wider, clinger. And be nicer, or your betters might stop being so courteous to all-talk bigots and superstitious slack-jaws.

        1. It wouldn’t we a Shikha article without Kirkland showing up and sharing his hatred for Americans.

          1. I like America — modern, tolerant, decent, educated, diverse, reasoning, successful, inclusive, reality-based, progressive America, in particular.

            In short, I like current America — the America clingers can’t abide.

            1. America will be even better when you shove a .45 up your ass and pull the trigger you subhuman piece of garbage.

            2. “If you’re not a Progressive totalitarian, I yearn to stamp your face with a boot – forever.”

        2. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland
          August.17.2019 at 7:19 pm
          “Open wider, clinger. And be nicer, or your betters might stop being so courteous to all-talk bigots and superstitious slack-jaws.”

          You’re posting to your betters, bigoted asshole.

        3. Like the brownshirts of a century ago, RAKL, you imagine yourself superior to everybody but are actually just a pathetic little man.

        4. Hey, Rev, do you do the mix-and-match insults yourself, or do you have a program? Just curious. I’m guessing program, because it would be a lot of labor to produce so many content-free posts by hand.

          1. Pointers on expression (let alone standard English) and civility from Trump fans?

            Lack of self-awareness is debilitating.

            1. Lack of self-awareness is debilitating.

              It’s certainly debilitating for you!

            2. “Lack of self-awareness is debilitating”

              Oreally Mr “Disaffected”?

              ______ is my favorite kind of _____ I’m looking right at you.

            3. Please kill yourself now you retarded piece of human excrement.

    3. This is representative of the quality of Reason’s trolls these days? Geeee-sus Christ, talk about tedious.. I’ve seen more effort in a reddit forum about retro-console games. Whatever happened our unhinged trolls like W.I./M.Stack? At least those dipshits could be arsed to put in a little effort..

    4. Shove a .45 up your ass and pull the trigger you backwoods knuckledragging retard.

  26. “Slamming shut.” LOL. That’s a good one.

  27. Thank you Shikha for writing articles that advocate securing the US border and limit illegal immigration.

    You stand out among the reason staff who want open borders.

  28. Places with doors, let alone golden ones, are not “open borders” Shikha wants this country to be a lean-to shed. A storage unit for other countries to get in and get out when they need something, but no one wants to live there except for pests.

    1. You have to control the number of people coming into a new land with alien customs; especially with unique ones like the USA.

      Many people do come from ‘shit hole’ countries hence why they want to be in America or America jr. Canada.

      Right now the signal is come, we give you free shit and don’t worry about our cherished ideals or Constitution.

      Not a good message.

      Samuel Huntington was onto something.

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

      In the 90s, this idea he posted seemed an impossibility even if it made sense. I remember ‘progressive conservatives’ here in Canada thinking this was just not possible as the vast majority of people simply assimilate.

      The idea that American culture and ideals overwhelms incoming people probably still is the case, but if the DNC’s message keeps up (along with them stripping individual responsibility and offloading it on to the state as Warren and Sanders pimp) it won’t be for long.

      In France, Islam is approaching 10% of the population now. This will be a direct test to the French identity as Muslims have no reason to accept Western values in numbers. Already a nation that abandoned Christianity before the French Revolution, it has no institution to defend it. The state seems to have lost its nerve. France is open borders. Same with the UK and others. Italy is the only major nation that woke up and smelled the coffee.

      Hence, guess what? Rise of populism and Yellow Vest movements and continuous unrest.

      1. ‘his idea he posited’. I have no idea why ‘auto-editor’ felt the need to change that.

      2. “here in Canada thinking this was just not possible as the vast majority of people simply assimilate.”

        I’d like to add which indeed they did and continue to do so.

        We don’t have that ‘10%’ issue here in North America. So in this way, there’s no reason to fear immigration on any level. But I have yet to see anyone of note advocate for closing of immigration Trump included – unless I missed it. No, I don’t consider his speeches taken out of context as ‘proof he’s against immigration’.

        I’d like to see the actual immigration numbers since Trump took over. I’m guessing it’s within the historic range.

        1. Well stay the hell out of my country commie socialist Canadian on the other side of the lake.

          Oh and we have our own gas and uranium. Fuck you very much.

          We don’t need you here.

          Rush was a good band. You can keep Drake.

          /s

          1. You don’t get to pick and choose. You want Rush, you take Drake too.

            1. Well, ok but just because Niel Peart.

              Which is the music link tonight nobody else cares about.

              Tom Sawyer. Read that book few times.

              Canadians stealing our classics.

              https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=auLBLk4ibAk

            2. Can we just “rent” the comedians?? Lots of funny Canadians, but they do tend to get stale. Or insane.

        2. “I’d like to add which indeed they did and continue to do so.”

          Do you have data to substantiate that, particularly with their views toward uniquely Anglo American political values?

          The data for Hispanic immigrants to the US suggests they are markedly different than the US population in their much greater preference for bigger government, which persists through 3+ generations.

          PEW Research on Hispanic Americans, breakdowns by immigration and foreign birth
          https://goo.gl/hxSJHi
          Hispanics Want Bigger Government Providing More Services over 3 to 1

          The trend is the same across immigrants generally.

          Import Not Americans, Become Not America.
          Become a *less libertarian* America.

          1. There are uniquely Anglo American political views?

            Define for me an Anglo American. Then uniquely political views held by this people.

            Imports. People were imported here we stopped that sometime around the civil war. People migrate which means choosing to live in one place or another they are neither imported nor exported.

            1. Different cultures come with different views on politics and economics; that’s part of what constitutes a culture.

              There is no mathematical definition of different cultures, but they exist; generally, people will tell you what culture they identify with, and that correlates with their economic and political views, as well as their voting patterns and economic outcomes.

              1. So what should we do with the cousinfucking redneck culture who doesn’t even believe the biggest crises our species and country are facing even exist? Execute them in large numbers?

                1. We could start by having inbred retards like you kill yourselves.

                  1. You say inbred retards, I say royal purity. And you’re probably one of those ridiculous incels who was pissed off that Dany turned mad queen.

                    1. Oh Esmerelda, you pathetic little dickless Okie faggot.

                2. There’s nothing you can do, and making the same stupid observations won’t change that.

                3. Naturally socialist Tony is a hysterical climate catastrophists.

                  It will be really funny to watch the mental gymnastics if the 25th solar cycle is as cold as expected.

                  1. Why do you waste your time and ours learning “facts” for the sole purpose of acquiring political talking points about a subject that shouldn’t be political and that make you sound like a goddamn idiot?

          2. Perhaps but generally, they assimilate. Blacks too tend to pull for bigger government as do native white progressives. Bernie Bros seem to be quite the white lot.

            Now whether they find their way to our classical liberal foundations in the West, ok maybe less so but a different matter.

            After all, it’s a European philosophy that really didn’t make its way to the new world outside North America. Heck, it was killed off in the West by WWI.

            I take it you agree with Huntington.

            1. Perhaps but generally, they assimilate.

              In the past, they have assimilated to Anglo-American culture; but that was when they were a small minority and the US didn’t tolerate Hispanic culture. Even then, it took many generations and wasn’t complete.

              Blacks too tend to pull for bigger government

              Yes, blacks who haven’t assimilated to Anglo-American culture.

              as do native white progressives. Bernie Bros seem to be quite the white lot

              “White” isn’t the same as “Anglo-American”; progressivism, socialism, and collectivism are dominant on continental Europe. It was large numbers of continental European immigrants that brought these ideas with them. The most significant recent push, and the most damaging to Anglo-American culture, was the emigration of continental European intellectuals during WWII and their takeover of US academic institutions.

              1. Yeh, those are all valid and fair points.

                German progressivism in academic circles has been a scourge for sure.

              2. A black American is likely to have a longer American lineage, and thus a larger claim to American culture, than a white person, especially a self-professed recent immigrant like yourself.

                Whatever black people think, that is American culture.

                You’re just a racist cunt. Let’s just deport you and fix both of our problems.

                1. Go hang out in a black neighborhood in a big city you White useless piece of garbage. I’m sure they’ll love having you. Make sure you tell them you’re gay too.

                  1. Oppressive racism and ghettoization are, unfortunately, indelible aspects of American culture as well.

                    1. Go hang out in a black neighborhood in a city, you dickless little white faggot. Come on up Esmerelda and get out of your little Lily white Okie backwater. I’m sure they’ll love you.

                    2. Oppressive racism and ghettoization are, unfortunately, indelible aspects of American culture as well.

                      It is. And you know who is responsible for it? Racists like you, Tony.

                2. “A black American is likely to have a longer American lineage,”

                  Lie.

                  1. Hey wow Tony saw this and neglected to provide a source, or any proof at all for his lie.

                    Should tell you all you need to know.

                    1. It’s just that when most of the black people were “migrating” here, it was a long time ago.

                    2. And forgot to bring any citations that support your claim with them I guess.

                    3. No citation needed for basic kindergarten history.

                3. thus a larger claim to American culture

                  I’m sorry, you seem to not understand that the US is a multicultural society. Blacks are clearly part of American culture as a whole. I merely said that blacks who haven’t assimilated to Anglo-American culture have failed to succeed economically; this is not a racial thing, because it is also true of whites who haven’t assimilated to Anglo-American culture (and there are millions of those as well).

                  You’re just a racist cunt. Let’s just deport you and fix both of our problems.

                  When you strip the self-righteous, virtue-signaling veneer from people like Tony, the bigotry, racism, and hatred that they conceal underneath comes out in full force. Thank you, Tony, for showing us your true face.

                  1. Anglo-Americans committed possibly the worst genocide in human history on this continent. Some culture.

                    “It’s not about race!”

                    What’s it about then? How to commit genocide the best?

            2. Data?

              I showed you mine that contradicted the “they assimilate” assumption.

              Where’s yours?

              Huntington said a lot of things. You’ll have to be more specific.

        3. Europe allowed family reunion, and actively recruited workers for jobs, like toilet cleaning, which the Dutch declined in the 60’s. Europe never had a policy, prioritizing educated immigrants, like Canada has. Europe recruited illiterate, unschooled workers (first generation). The third generation has been targeted by radical Islam that non-believers are infidels (see Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s books).

      3. “You have to control the number of people coming into a new land with alien customs; especially with unique ones like the USA.“

        Nothing unique in the USA.

        Some of them aliens.

        They have whole different holidays, worship a different god, food…ok food you guys invented poutine and crappy beer.

        They come from a different planet in some cases. There was the day the Earth Stood Still.

        1. Oh I beg to differ. USA is unique where the idea of individual sovereignty is concerned.

          And The Constitution.

          1. Even if culture is part of the gossamer not to be dissected, GDP, debt, military spending, power generation, nuclear power generation, etc., etc. makes for lots of objective uniqueness.

        2. They have whole different holidays, worship a different god, food…ok food you guys invented poutine and crappy beer.

          More importantly, most other cultures reject the protestant work ethic, self-reliance, personal responsibility, and small government.

          1. Noticing that cultures are different is so racist!
            Except when we say that diversity is our strength!

        3. “Nothing unique in the USA.”

          Probably the First and Second Amendments alone make the US unique.

      4. You’re supposed to be libertarians.

        Your first phrase is “You have to control…”

        You’re a fucking joke.

        And the fact that you think it’s OK to try to control immigration because the immigrants have political beliefs that differ from yours…? It’s like you’re extremely terrible at this. I’m practically a socialist and I’m a better libertarian than you.

        What happened to letting people be free and watching as the chips fall where they may? What the absolute fuck is all this horseshit about preserving your culture? It’s not your culture. It’s… whatever it is. That’s what freedom means, bitch.

        1. What happened to letting people be free and watching as the chips fall where they may?

          That applies to a libertarian society. In a libertarian society, you have to live with the consequences of your own decisions. Libertarian societies can have open borders.

          We live in a progressive welfare state. In progressive welfare states, costs and benefits are transferred among people. You cannot open borders to a progressive welfare state, and open borders don’t make a progressive welfare state more libertarian.

          1. How many times do I have to destroy this argument before you come up with a new excuse to be anti-freedom as long as brown people are concerned?

            Immigrants, naturally, skew younger. Illegal immigrants are barred from taking social welfare, but they usually pay taxes into the system anyway.

            They are a boon to the welfare state. At least complain about that. You don’t want people propping up the welfare state. That would be a libertarian, if rather starkly pragmatic, argument. Relying on lies and hypocritical crocodile tears over the federal budget isn’t convincing anyone.

            1. Tony, you’re a liar. No one cares about your opinion. Especially when you lie about economics.

              1. Citation please.

                See that funny joke I made that was about the ironic acknowledgment of some remnant of intelligence in Tulsa’s crack-addled brain?

                1. “Citation please.”

                  You made the first affirmative argument. That would be your responsibility, according to one chemjeff.

                  And yes, we notice your arguments are always unsourced. Because you’re a liar who devolves to weak insults when you realize you’ve beclowned yourself by getting caught lying again.

                  1. You do understand that your sole purpose in my life is as a means to master the art of insulting people, yes?

                    1. Yes, I understand that you know you have no hope of winning a debate, and so must gather what small benefit from my destruction of you that you can find.

                      And so does everyone else.

            2. ” Illegal immigrants are barred from taking social welfare, ”

              Leftists Always Lie.

        2. “You’re supposed to be libertarians.”

          You’re not.

          1. You’re supposed to be mentally stable, but either genes or heavy drug use or a combination of both have turned you into a danger to yourselves and other. The irony of you going from a libertarian commenter to ward of the state would sure be amusing.

            1. Go hang out in North Philly and tell them you’re a dick smoker. They’ll love you.

              1. I got sucked off by a black guy in Chicago once. Do you know he barely even shot me and hardly even stole all my stuff before not even really knocking up a crackwhore and throwing gang signs to fellow droopy-pantsed hoods? Stereotypes, what are you gonna do with them?

                1. Oh snap the dick smoker crawled out of his Okie backwater once and scored with one gay black guy in a gay enclave. He’s the expert. Must’ve loved your gigantic clock, right Esmerelda.

                2. Was he Nigerian?
                  Or, was his name Jussie?

                  1. Did he shout “This is MAGA Country”?

            2. Wow, pointing out how stupid your observation is really set your fag ass off.

              1. Ooh, I got the all over fidgets from that fag-bomb. Are these other cousin sodomizers following you into troll-hunting paranoia, or are you following them into rank bigoted cuntery? These are the questions that define our times.

                1. “Ooh, I got the all over fidget”

                  Yes, we can see that you sad faggot.

                  1. I’m sad only because you aren’t here and I’m not a size queen.

                    1. Wow how are you still upset about being called a faggot, faggot?

                      Calm down.

                    2. I’m upset that sexually frustrated men with below-average cocks don’t think they can get action when the well-endowed community is perfectly welcoming of them. If we were size queens, we’d almost always be disappointed, so why bother? And that’s just a waste of cock. All cocks welcome. But no fatties.

  29. “In 2015, Trump kicked off his election campaign with an infamous speech claiming that Mexico was sending “rapists and criminals” to America—never mind that immigrants, both authorized and unauthorized, commit crimes at far lower rates than the native-born, according to numerous studies by academics, think tanks, and the government itself. Any hope that he would dial back such dehumanizing comments once he got to the White House was quickly dashed. The president has denigrated people from “shithole countries” and resurrected long discarded blood-and-soil tropes, claiming, for example, that Central Americans fleeing organized crime and desperate poverty want to “infest” the United States.”

    I stopped here and came to the comments.

    1. I remember when Reason used to highlite the massive rape problem in the human trafficking of illegal aliens.

      I think I first heard about rape trees from an ENB article.

      Doesn’t seem to fit The Narrative anymore.

      “ENB so racist!”

      1. Yeh, noticed that too.

        Have they denied rape happens?

    2. Looks like somebody went to the Kathy Newman School of Non-Debate.

  30. Hey Shikha, Don’t let America’s Golden Doorknob hit you on the ass on the way out. Might rattle your brain loose.

  31. Unenforced immigration laws create a subculture of illegal immigrants who dare not complain when they are exploited. Meanwhile, Progressive opposition to either changing the immigration laws or enforcing them creates increasing opposition to moderate measures. Is it any wonder, therefore, that the door is being slammed shut?

    Calling people evil names, like ‘racist’, may be emotionally satisfying, but it is a poor way to convince them of your position.

    1. “subculture of illegal immigrants who dare not complain when they are exploited”

      This is a feature and not a bug to the ruling class. Same with work visas.

    2. Unenforced immigration laws create a subculture of illegal immigrants who dare not complain when they are exploited

      It’s Democrats doing what they have always been doing: enslave people.

    3. “Calling people evil names, like ‘racist’, may be emotionally satisfying, but it is a poor way to convince them of your position”

      That won’t stop Reason’s staff, psychoticjeff, eunuch, sqrlsy, jfree, and others from trying every day!

  32. Well I’m not a big fan of Trump’s immigration crackdown (on legal or illegal immigrants), but I’d hardly call enforcing the bipartisan laws as written “shocking excesses”.

    1. If we *actually* enforced our immigration laws we’d be deporting any illegal alien who ever comes in contact with government services, including schools.

    2. Further; enforcing laws people don’t like is a far better method for getting them changed than just pretending they aren’t there.

  33. Shikha could do a better job of ignoring the snipers-razorwire fence between hindu India and mohammedan India (aka Pakistan) to attack the president at, say, Mother Jones, Utne Reader or The Guardian. This would also drive fewer voters away from the LP. Bush Republicans invaded and bombed the Ottoman dustbin because Congress obstructs nuclear electric generation. After Saudis knocked down the WTC, and amok berserkers similar in pigmentation and persuasion terrorized Europe before November 2016, voters cooled on importing alien suicide vest models, starvelings and such. The LP can work other fronts while Shikha leads the WaPo or the NYT in combat against Congress and the voters who elected it. Reason owes her no platform for blinkered shrieking at voters.

    1. “This would also drive fewer voters away from the LP.”

      Reason is the Approved Opposition. They’re here to discredit libertarianism.

      Is there really any other explanation for Shikha being a regular contributor at Reason?

      Yeah, she could just be a loon herself, but the Reason Powers That Be let her spout her nonsense, which is an embarrassment even to the Open Borders crowd.

  34. Something’s missing from analyses of US immigration policy: data on the movement of criminals and low-skill workers from state to state within the USA. Are these data harder to get, or easier? Seems to me it should be easy to model both the causes and effects of immigration of less-desirables and undesirables by relocations of such persons within the country. Which policies attract the less desirable? Which repel them? What is the effect on the states they leave and the states they move to?

    1. All the diversity we’re importing is entirely homogeneous in negative and positive qualities and it is totally racist to suggest otherwise!

      #AnalysisSoRacist

    2. Something’s missing from analyses of US immigration policy: data on the movement of criminals and low-skill workers from state to state within the USA. Are these data harder to get, or easier?

      Little data is available to begin with; how would you know whether illegal low skill workers move from state to state? They use false identification and are likely to change to from time to time.

      Even when data is available, government agencies guard it jealously. You can’t even get comprehensive data on violent crimes committed by illegal aliens, or individual case files, from DHS.

  35. “America’s Golden Door Is Slamming Shut”

    Shikha is just trying to cheer me up.

    #winning

  36. All the diversity we’re importing is entirely homogeneous in negative and positive qualities and it is totally racist to suggest otherwise!

  37. Reason didn’t see a backlash coming from 40+ years of ILLEGAL immigration? WOW!

    1. It’s worse than that. They seem to be taking a ‘nothing to see here’ approach.

      I know they keep saying ‘immigrants commit less crimes’ but not so sure about that. The fact an illegal already broke the law and committed a crime doesn’t seem to fit into their arguments.

      1. When someone opens a statement on immigration by failing to distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants, then everything that comes after is horse shit.

        1. Anyone who ignores the policy reality and humanitarian issues in order to bitch and moan over a semantic tautology is a stupid fucking asshole.

          1. Anyone who ignores the policy reality and humanitarian issues

            We’re not ignoring the “humanitarian issues” at all: the policies you advance are bad for Americans, bad for the migrants themselves, and bad for their countries of origin.

            1. I was responding to the oh-so-libertarian argument that “it’s illegal, thus it’s bad.”

              1. So, an argument no one made.

                Because you’re human garbage and can’t win an actual debate of any kind.

                  1. You’ll notice he didn’t even try to deny it.

                    1. Will they though?

            2. Invading a country against the will of it’s residents never has any negative consequences.

              It always ends well.
              No “humanitarian issues” to see here!

              1. Imagine not describing simple immigration or asylum requests as a military invasion, and see if you don’t come out smarter.

                Letting Sean Hannity shit in your ears and vomiting out his shit from your mouth is no way to go through life. Which I feel should go without saying.

                1. Requests aren’t an invasion. Coordinating with thousands of others to enter and remain whether or not your requests are granted is an invasion.

          2. Tony seems to be having a conniption fit today.

            1. I’m pretty sure he has a drinking problem.

      2. Unauthorized entry into the US is a crime, however overstaying a visa is not. But even accounting for that I don’t see how you can get a lower rate when looking at all crimes. Violent crime maybe, but not all crime

  38. The president has denigrated people from “shithole countries”

    I am an immigrant. Saying that I come from a “shithole country” or that my former countrymen are awful people isn’t a denigrating to me. Why do you think I left in the first place?

    I have no understanding for immigrants like Shikha, people who come here and then demand that people like and respect their culture and country of origin; if you liked it so much, why did you come to the US?

    1. So much this.

      She seems to be promoting multiculturalism to make her anti-Trump point on illegal immigration.

    2. Get out.

      Also, what is this American culture that you think free people ought to be forced to assimilate to? Does it included soft tacos, or only hard ones?

      1. Well don’t know much about what American culture is.

        Surfing around the past few days and found a music link I am sure nobody else cares about.

        Dave Brubeck quartet Take Five. Composed by Paul Desmond and written in an odd time signature 5/4.

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jT1FHNrmPj8

      2. Taco Bell, winner of the franchise wars, is happy to offer both – including my favorite, the double decker: hard shell taco wrapped in a soft tortilla with refried beans between the soft and hard shells

        1. Wrap it in a NY-style pizza and they might have something there.

    3. I don’t assume that people from shithole countries are awful people.

      Just that their beliefs and values lead to a shithole country, which is *empirically* demonstrated by the fact of their shithole country. But that doesn’t make them awful. That’s the human *default*.

      That any groups found beliefs and values that created anything but a shithole country is a miracle that took mankind thousands of years of shithole civilizations to achieve.

      I don’t want those miracles destroyed, particularly the one I live in.

      That isn’t hatred and contempt for the rest of humanity in the world today, or throughout human history. It’s sad that everyone can’t have the same miracle.

      But it’s not magic dirt that makes the miracle. It’s magic ideas. And most people don’t have the magic, no matter how much we try to give it away to them.

    1. Pointless fantasizing.

    2. The analysis is missing the point. In a libertarian society, you wouldn’t have to exclude people at the border, nor would “Alice, Bob, and Charles” simply own parcels on the border.

      A truly libertarian society would likely consist of large HOAs, usually with voting rights only for property owners and admission based on something similar to private “credit scores” and the preferences of the property owners in each association. It wouldn’t be all that different from the way the US started out.

    3. PaulB accidentally flagged your comment while scrolling, sorry. Reason’s format sucks.

  39. The article or the link to pay Paul?

    1. To Vernon re PaulB’s post.

  40. “never mind that immigrants, both authorized and unauthorized, commit crimes at far lower rates than the native-born,”

    Lie upon lie after lie. I didnt bother reading past this.

  41. National security is a valid federal function. When people want to arrive they should be checked to ensure they are not criminals, terrorists, etc. My ancestors were checked out at Ellis Island as was the ancestors of approximately 40% of our nations population. When someone knocks you check out who it is before you let them in. That is not anti-immigration it is just good sense.

  42. America’s Golden Door is a welcoming as it has always been, lit by the light of Liberty.

    But we’ve installed lock’s on America’s Silver Windows that you idiots keep trying to climb through because you don’t want to knock at the Door.

  43. It’s not libertarian to support open borders without welfare reform. Bonkers!

  44. Reason is populated by confused left wing people

  45. We don’t want to turn into Europe- they had an open border policy and look what happened.

    I am against Trump on most issues, but I applaud his stance on border security. The problem here is that people are saying he is separating children from their families, but these families are breaking federal law mind you. If I get a DUI and I have my kid in the car that kid is going to get separated from me. Instead of blaming the terrible parents for dragging their children into this mess, the left blames Trump which makes no sense. Also remember that most asylum claims are bogus and as Obama once said: “Crime and poverty are not qualifiers for asylum”.

  46. both authorized and unauthorized, commit crimes at far lower rates than the native-born

    If they are “unauthorized” (I believe the legal term is “illegal alien”…) then they have already committed a crime.

  47. It’s a game now to see how long it takes for you to start propagandizing in your articles and you only took 4 sentences this time.

    “never mind that immigrants, both authorized and unauthorized, commit crimes at far lower rates than the native-born, according to numerous studies by academics, think tanks, and the government itself.”

    The point isn’t who commits more crimes and you really don’t want to start using this kind of logic for who belongs in this country. Otherwise we would end up deporting only blacks and hispanics. The point is that these crimes would NOT have occurred had the law simply been followed. Some crimes would still occur due to the gargantuan job ICE has been tasked with, but fewer crimes would occur. Furthermore, your lack of sympathy for American CITIZENS of all backgrounds who have suffered due to illegal immigrant crime is disgusting. The combination of lack of sympathy (look at how the MSM treats Angel Moms) with the seemingly intentional drive to steal Congressional seats, electoral votes, and extend voting rights to illegals is the reason why many people have started calling leftists traitors. If your own countrymen aren’t your first priority, what is?

  48. I dont care what it’s called so long as people are kept out of the country as much as possible. Especially poor, uneducated ones – regardless of skin color or whatever.

  49. Thanks Shikha, for continuing to stand up for the rights of immigrants, whose individual rights are, by the way, the same as the rights of any American citizen. Rights come from our nature and from the respect we extend to each other, not from the government.
    Those who do not respect the rights and liberties of immigrants, do not deserve to enjoy such rights.

    1. Citizenship in a nation has always come with rights and responsibilities. This concept goes back literally thousands of years. So kindly fuck off.

  50. I love your article guys tend to be up too, such a nice work. Keep it up and continues your work.
    visit us: https://printeroffline.support/

  51. This article gave me such a boner!

    He has done one or two dumb things on immigration… But for the most part I just wish he could actually get all the shit done he wants. With a welfare state and universal suffrage anybody who thinks we should have open borders with 3rd world nations is INSANE. INSANE. INSANE.

    No 1st world country could continue to exist with true open borders. That we ONLY have limited numbers of illegals that try to come in is the only thing that has kept things in check. If we truly legally opened the floodgates we’d be obliterated in no time at all.

    Quit being such naive utopians you morons! Destroying the best country on earth IS NOT worth it just for a not very important “right” such as international freedom of movement. It’s just not. Quit being such bleeding heart pussies.

Please to post comments