Thread: Can Republican Governors Block Syrian Refugees From Settling in Their States?

Originally Posted by patbrunz

From the arguments above, it seems that the federal government doesn't really have the power to admit them, but just for the sake of argument, let's say it does. If states, and even cities, can nullify federal immigration laws to become so-called "sanctuaries" for illegal aliens and states can nullify federal drug laws by "legalizing" a drug like marijuana that is illegal according to federal law, why can't a state nullify federal authority to take in refugees?

Great idea!! State legislatures need to immediately pass laws that refuse all immigration, refugees, green cards, asylum-seekers, illegal aliens, DAPAs, DACA's, all of it. They do that right here right now and the states need to argue their right to do so under Article 1, Section 9, as well as Articles 9 and 10 of the US Constitution.

States however can not over-ride federal prohibition of immigration and allow immigrants into their state prohibited by the federal government so the states with sanctuary cities are in fact violating the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 9.

Furthermore, all these "Constitutionalists" who are claiming "religious liberty" under the First Amendment, who harbor, aid and abet and advocate for illegal aliens, they are also violating the US Constitution when they violate US immigration law.

Originally Posted by patbrunz

From the arguments above, it seems that the federal government doesn't really have the power to admit them, but just for the sake of argument, let's say it does. If states, and even cities, can nullify federal immigration laws to become so-called "sanctuaries" for illegal aliens and states can nullify federal drug laws by "legalizing" a drug like marijuana that is illegal according to federal law, why can't a state nullify federal authority to take in refugees?

Actually, I believe Congress can admit whom they please, but only in Washington, D.C., where Congress has exclusive power to legislate. However, the surrounding states do not have to accept unwanted foreigners as they have retained their original policing power over immigration, which is a power never delegated to the federal government!


JWK




When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Islamic terrorist activities begin in our southern Border States or cities like NewYork City?

Originally Posted by johnwk

Actually, I believe Congress can admit whom they please, but only in Washington, D.C., where Congress has exclusive power to legislate. However, the surrounding states do not have to accept unwanted foreigners as they have retained their original policing power over immigration, which is a power never delegated to the federal government!


JWK




When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Islamic terrorist activities begin in our southern Border States or cities like NewYork City?

Congress does not have the right or authority to admit immigrants, not even into DC, not anywhere, because it has no authority to admit any immigrants.

Congress has no authority under the US Constitution to admit any immigrants to anywhere, not to a state, not to a territory, not to the District of Columbia. Congress only has the authority to prohibit immigration after the year 1808, not admit it.

Rights and Available Benefits After a Grant of Asylum

After you receive your final approval of asylum, you can apply for certain immigration-related and other government benefits and services. These will help you and your family adjust to living in the Unites States. Be sure to act quickly, because some benefits are available only for a limited time after you are granted asylum.

Note that you are not yet eligible for asylee benefits if your asylum case is on appeal or if you received conditional or recommended approval.

Here, you will find guidance on what benefits might be available to you after you obtain asylum, and how to apply for them.

Making Sure Your Spouse and Unmarried Children Receive(d) Asylum

Once you have been granted asylum, your immediate family members (spouse and children) -- whether they are in the U.S. or outside -- are entitled to a “derivative” grant of asylum. If your spouse and children were included in your asylum application and are physically present in the U.S., they will have automatically received asylum at the same time as you.

If they are overseas, or were not included in your application, you can file USCIS Form I-730, “Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition” to obtain asylum for them. Use a separate form for each family member. For further information, see Nolo's article, "Filling Out Form I-730, Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition."

For your spouse to be eligible for asylum, the two of you must have been legally married (that is, with a government-issued certificate) before you were granted asylum. For your children to be eligible, they must be unmarried and younger than 21.

Obtaining Benefits Visa a Local Refugee Resettlement Agency

As soon as possible after obtaining asylum, you should contact a Refugee Resettlement Agency (RRA). The RRA should be able to help you adjust to living in the United States. RRAs may help you even if you are already working. Depending on the local agency, and on your individual circumstances (including your family size, income, and savings), RRAs might help you in some of the following ways:

• provide cash, housing, and/or living-expenses assistance
• help you apply for government benefits and services (such as an SS card, travel document, health care, and food stamps)
• enroll you in English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) classes
• offer job-training classes, counseling, and job placement services, and
• provide you with psychological counseling.

Be aware that some services have application deadlines. That is, you must apply for some programs offered to asylees within a certain time period (as few as 30 days after you were granted asylum) in order to be eligible. To find the closest RRA, visit http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr.

Also, some of the services you may be eligible for have expiration dates. Some benefits for which RRAs may help you apply are available only during the first seven years after you are granted asylum. These include: Supplemental Security Income (if you are disabled); food stamps; Temporary Assistance to Needy Families; Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC); and Medicaid (health care benefits). Once you get your green card or become a U.S. citizen, you might be able to extend your eligibility for certain public benefits.

Applying for a Social Security Card

Asylees are automatically eligible to work in the United States. You do not need an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) to do so. However, you should apply for a Social Security card, which employers will ask for, and which will enable you to apply for various public benefits. As an asylee, you are eligible for an “unrestricted” social security card, which does not place any limitations on your employment.

To obtain your SS card, go to your local SS Administration office. To find an office near you, call 1-800-772-1213. Bring original proof of your asylum grant, and proof of identity (such as a passport or state-issued ID card). Make sure to keep a receipt from the SS Administration that you had applied for a SS number to show other agencies when you apply for public benefits before you get your SS card.

You will receive your SS card in the mail within a few weeks.

Double check that it does not have any restrictions written on it. If you do not receive it or if it has restrictions, return to the same SS office to inquire.

If you currently have a restricted SS number, you should go to the SS office and apply for an unrestricted SS card. Again, make sure to bring documentation proving that you were granted asylum.

Getting a Driver’s License or a State Identification Card

As an asylee, you may obtain an official identification (ID) card from the state where you live. Some states allow you to get a state ID card; others require that you obtain a driver’s license (which typically requires you to take a written, and a driving test).

Most states require that you have a Social Security (SS) number before issuing your ID card. If you already have a SS# assigned, bring proof of that to your local motor vehicles office.

One Year After Your Grant of Asylum: Applying for Your Green Card

After you have lived in the U.S. for one year since your grant of asylum, you can apply for a green card. In technical terms, this is called “adjusting” your status to “lawful permanent resident.”

For guidance on why it is important to apply for permanent residence as soon as possible, and what you need for a successful application, see “How to Apply for Permanent Residence as an Asylee.”

Traveling Abroad and Reentering the U.S.

In order to reenter the U.S. after temporary travel abroad, you will need a refugee travel document. You can obtain it by filing USCIS Form I-131, “Application for Travel Document.” It might take several months for you to receive it. Travel documents expire. So keep track, to make sure that your travel document will still be valid when you try to reenter the United States.

You should NOT go back to the country from which you are claiming persecution. If you do, the U.S. government may decide that you do not fear persecution there anymore, and take away your asylum status. Similarly, do not travel using a passport issued by the country from which you had claimed persecution.

Four Years After Obtaining Your Green Card: Applying for U.S. Citizenship

You may apply for U.S. citizenship (to "naturalize") four years after obtaining your green card. The procedure for this is to file Form N-400, “Application for Naturalization.”

Technically, you are eligible to apply for citizenship five years after you officially become a permanent resident. However, one year of your time as an asylee counts as if you already had a green card. This is known as “rollback.” Hence, your green card will specify your starting permanent residence date as one year before your residence application was actually approved.

For further guidance on naturalization, see "How to Become a U.S. Citizen."

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...nt-asylum.html

Originally Posted by Judy

Congress does not have the right or authority to admit immigrants, not even into DC, not anywhere, because it has no authority to admit any immigrants.

Congress has no authority under the US Constitution to admit any immigrants to anywhere, not to a state, not to a territory, not to the District of Columbia. Congress only has the authority to prohibit immigration after the year 1808, not admit it.

Judy,

I'm not going to argue the issue with regard to Washington, D.C. I can only go by what our Constitution states in crystal clear language. Congress has power:

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

But don't get me wrong because I stand by the fact that our federal government has absolutely no power to force upon the states unwanted migrants. The fact is, the entry of such was of great concern by the States and why Congress was granted a power to make the rules by which a foreigner may become a citizen of the United States.

To confirm the States were concerned about unwanted foreigners being forced upon them, and to prevent this from happening, they granted power to Congress to adopt a uniform rule over naturalization. Let us review the legislative intent expressed by our founders with regard to this issue.


REPRESENTATIVE SHERMAN, who attended the Constitutional Convention which framed our Constitution points to the intentions for which a power over naturalization was granted to Congress. He says: “that Congress should have the power of naturalization, in order to prevent particular States receiving citizens, and forcing them upon others who would not have received them in any other manner. It was therefore meant to guard against an improper mode of naturalization, rather than foreigners should be received upon easier terms than those adopted by the several States.” see CONGRESSIONAL DEBATES, Rule of Naturalization, Feb. 3rd, 1790PAGE1148

In addition, REPRESENTATIVE WHITE while debating the Rule of Naturalization notes the narrow limits of what “Naturalization” [the power granted to Congress] means, and he”doubted whether the constitution authorized Congress to say on what terms aliens or citizens should hold lands in the respective States; the power vested by the Constitution in Congress, respecting the subject now before the House, extend to nothing more than making a uniform rule of naturalization. After a person has once become a citizen, the power of congress ceases to operate upon him; the rights and privileges of citizens in the several States belong to those States; but acitizen of one State is entitled to all the privileges and immunities of the citizens in the several States…..all, therefore, that the House have to do on this subject, is to confine themselves to an uniform rule of naturalization and not to a general definition of what constitutes the rights of citizenship in the several States.” see: Rule of Naturalization, Feb. 3rd, 1790,page1152

And finally, REPRESENTATIVE STONE … concluded that the laws and constitutions of the States, and the constitution of the United States; would trace out the steps by which they should acquire certain degrees of citizenship [page 1156]. Congress may point out a uniform rule of naturalization; but cannot say what shall be the effect of that naturalization, as it respects the particular States. Congress cannot say that foreigners, naturalized, under a general law, shall be entitled to privileges which the States withhold from native citizens. See: Rule of Naturalization, Feb. 3rd, 1790, pages1156and 1157



In regard to the year 1808, you are absolutely correct that Congress, after 1808, has been vested with a power to lay a tax on foreigners which a state thinks proper to admit.


JWK

The same applies to the District of Columbia as to the States because any immigrant admitted to the District of Columbia would be free to move to a State and become a burden upon them without the request of or consent of the States. The naturalization clause only deals with how immigrants already admitted by the States may at some point become citizens.

Nowhere in the US Constitution is the Congress or any other federal branch of government granted "authority" to admit immigrants anywhere in the US. I understand why one might think otherwise with respect to the District of Columbia, however, federal authority over a federal city does not by itself grant powers not applicable to a federal city which most certainly would not include filling it up with foreigners at the hands of the federal government which has no authority to admit immigrants anywhere else because what the Congress does in our federal city spills over into the States. The District of Columbia is still part of the United States, it is not a separate nation state like Vatican City, it is still subject to our US Constitution as is any legislation the Congress may choose to enact.

Overall, I believe we are in full agreement. At first blush, one might think oh well maybe in the District of Columbia, as I did at one time, but when I reviewed even that, it was clear that the admission into the District of Columbia would spill over into the States and be the same unauthorized immigration activity the Founders didn't want the federal government to have, and does not have to this day.

This important fact in our Constitution should be the basis of all State and Citize actions to stop all federal immigration into our country as well as all activist organizations like NumbersUSA, ALIPAC and so many others to bring this disaster to its end.

Originally Posted by Judy

The same applies to the District of Columbia as to the States because any immigrant admitted to the District of Columbia would be free to move to a State and become a burden upon them without the request of or consent of the States. .

Judy,

I appreciate your opinion but if you are correct then the states have surrendered their original policing power over immigration. But, from everything I have found from researching our forefathers views on this subject, the states have without question retained their power to determine who may migrate into their state, and that would include adopting laws as to which foreigners or persons may or may not enter and reside in their state. The exception to this of course is a person who has been blessed with acquiring citizenship under the rules set by Congress.

In any event, I agree that we are pretty much on the same page. and why I do not believe it is productive to discuss the issue of Congress' delegated powers within the borders of Washington, D.C. This distraction is not productive at this time!


JWK


To support Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio or John Kasich is to support a continuance of Obama's illegal immigration tyranny which includes giving legal status and work permits to tens of millions who have invaded our borders!

The problem is the "acts" etc - they change everything unless they are repealed; e.g. Carter's refugee act and gw with his border acts - oh any child approaching our borders will be taken in etc. Another factor is the international UN Refugee system which supposedly we have to accept whatever they say. A muslim is heading that sector - how convenient for them.

This agenda to change the face of America has been in process for decades. O is the perfect stooge to nearly complete the deceit and hillary is in the wings - God forbid!

Originally Posted by johnwk

Judy,

I appreciate your opinion but if you are correct then the states have surrendered their original policing power over immigration. But, from everything I have found from researching our forefathers views on this subject, the states have without question retained their power to determine who may migrate into their state, and that would include adopting laws as to which foreigners or persons may or may not enter and reside in their state. The exception to this of course is a person who has been blessed with acquiring citizenship under the rules set by Congress.

In any event, I agree that we are pretty much on the same page. and why I do not believe it is productive to discuss the issue of Congress' delegated powers within the borders of Washington, D.C. This distraction is not productive at this time!


JWK


To support Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio or John Kasich is to support a continuance of Obama's illegal immigration tyranny which includes giving legal status and work permits to tens of millions who have invaded our borders!

There is no authority anywhere in the US Constitution for the federal government to admit immigrants into the jurisdiction of the United States which includes the District of Columbia. Federally sponsored, licensed, permitted immigration is unconstitutional. The only authority the federal government, all 3 branches, has with regards to "migration and importation of such persons" is to prohibit it. This is not a power that can be granted or created through Congress or legislation, whether it be to admit immigrants into the Port of New York, a border to Mexico, an airport in Seattle or off the Potomac in the District of Columbia.

Think of it this way, think of it like the income tax. The federal government had no authority to impose an income tax under the US Constitution. The Constitution had to be amended in order for this to occur. Yes, Lincoln imposed an income tax during the Civil War, under the War Powers and 7 years after the war, and the bills had been largely paid, the income tax was ended. But in order to revive it and put it into play on a long term basis outside of war-time, the Constitution had to be amended to grant such a power.

Immigration is the same. If Americans want the federal government admitting millions of immigrants into the US every year, legally or illegally, then we would have to amend the US Constitution to allow such a thing.

That's the simplest way to look at it, because it's clear as a bell that the federal government has no authority or power to admit any immigrants into the jurisdiction of the United States, it only has the authority and power after the year 1808 to prohibit and prevent it.

Other short titles	Refugee Act of 1980
Long title	An Act to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to revise the procedures for the admission of refugees, to amend the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 to establish a more uniform basis for the provision of assistance to refugees, and for other purposes.
Nicknames	Refugee Act of 1979
Enacted by	the 96th United States Congress
Effective	March 17, 1980
Citations
Public law	96-212
Statutes at Large	94 Stat. 102
Codification
Acts amended	Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 Migration and Refugee Assistance Act
Titles amended	8 U.S.C.: Aliens and Nationality
U.S.C. sections amended	8 U.S.C. ch. 12, subch. I § 1101 et seq. 8 U.S.C. ch. 12, subch. II §§ 1157-1159 8 U.S.C. ch. 12, subch. IV § 1521 et seq.
Legislative history
Introduced in the Senate as S. 643 by Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) on March 13, 1979 Committee consideration by Senate Judiciary, House Judiciary Passed the Senate on September 6, 1979 (85-0) Passed the House on December 20, 1979 (328-47, in lieu of H.R. 2816) Reported by the joint conference committee on February 22, 1980; agreed to by the Senate on February 26, 1980 (agreed) and by the House on March 4, 1980 (211-195) Signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on March 17, 1980

The United States Refugee Act of 1980
(Public Law 96-212) was an amendment to the earlier Immigration and Nationality Act and the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act, and was created to provide a permanent and systematic procedure for the admission to the United States of refugees of special humanitarian concern to the U.S., and to provide comprehensive and uniform provisions for the effective resettlement and absorption of those refugees who are admitted.^[1] The act was completed on March 3, 1980, was signed by President Jimmy Carter on March 17, 1980 and became effective on April 1, 1980. This was the first comprehensive amendment of U.S. general immigration laws designed to face up to the realities of modern refugee situations by stating a clear-cut national policy and providing a flexible mechanism to meet the rapidly shifting developments of today's world policy.^[2] The main objectives of the act were to create a new definition of refugee based on the one created at the UN Convention and Protocol on the Status of Refugees, raise the limitation from 17,400 to 50,000 refugees admitted each fiscal year, provide emergency procedures for when that number exceeds 50,000, and to establish the Office of U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. Most importantly, it established explicit procedures on how to deal with refugees in the U.S. by creating a uniform and effective resettlement and absorption policy.^[3]

Contents

• 1Purpose
  
  • 1.1Admission of refugees
  
  
• 2U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs and Assistance for Effective Resettlement of Refugees in the U.S.
• 3History
• 4External links
• 5Notes
• 6References

Purpose[edit]

The Act recognizes that it has been the historic policy of the United States to respond to the urgent needs of persons subject to persecution in their homelands and to provide assistance, asylum, and resettlement opportunities to admitted refugees. The goal of the Refugee Act was to create a uniform procedure with which to provide these opportunities to refugees.^[4]

Admission of refugees[edit]

The Act amended the Immigration and Nationality Act by defining a refugee as any person who is outside his or her country of residence or nationality, or without nationality, and is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.^[5]

The annual admission of refugees is set to a 50,000 cap per fiscal year unless in an emergency situation, during which the president may change this number for a period of twelve months. The Attorney General is also granted power to admit additional refugees and grant asylum to current aliens, but all admissions must be reported to congress and are limited to 5,000 people.^[6]

U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs and Assistance for Effective Resettlement of Refugees in the U.S.[edit]

The Act created the position of U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs who was now responsible to the president for the development of overall U.S. refugee admission and resettlement policy.

Title IV of the Immigration and Nationality Act was amended here when the Act created the Office of Refugee Resettlement, which is responsible for funding and administering federal programs for domestic resettlement and assistance to refugees. The office must make available resources for employment training and placement for refugees to be economically self-sufficient, provide opportunities for English language training, ensure cash assistance, and guarantee gender equality in all training and instruction. The Office must also create grants for these projects, consult with state and local governments about sponsorship and distribution of refugees, and develop a system to monitor the use of government funds using evaluations, auditing and data collection. In order to receive assistance for programs, the States must first explain how they plan to accomplish the goals of these programs, meet the director's standards, and submit a report at the end of each fiscal year.^[7]

The Secretary of State was authorized to take on this role from 1980-1981 while the new director worked with them to develop and implement programs for existing refugees and eventually took up the position from 1982 onward.

The director must submit a congressional report at the end of each fiscal year to committees on the Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate. The reports should contain information on the geographic location, employment status, and problems of the refugees while also containing suggestions for alternative resettlement strategies. The Office was authorized $200,000,000 during 1980 and 1981 and that number is now decided at the beginning of each fiscal year based on the results received at the end of each year.^[8]

History[edit]

It wasn't until after World War II that the United States began to differentiate the term "refugee" from "immigrant" and began creating policy that dealt specifically with refugees while working outside of immigration policy.^[9] Early action came in the form of the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, the Refugee Relief Act of 1953, and the Refugee-Escapee Act of 1957.^[10] The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which was later amended in 1965 to include policy for refugees on a case by case basis, was the first Act that the consolidated U.S. immigration policy into one body of text.

The creation of the Refugee Act began with hearings by the United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security from 1965–1968, which recommended that congress create a uniform system for refugees, but received little support. Edward Kennedy began writing to propose a bill to reform refugee policy in 1978 and first introduced the idea to the United States Senate in 1979. With his proposal, he hoped to address the need for a reformed, non need-based policy that was not specifically designed for people from communist regimes in Eastern Europe or repressive governments in the Middle East, as it was in the past. At the time, there was an average of 200,000 refugees coming to the United States, most of which were Indochinese and Soviet Jews.^[11] The cost of resettlement was close to $4,000, but most refugees eventually paid this amount in federal income taxes.

Many Americans feared a floodgate scenario with a large and sudden increase of the refugee population, but the 50,000 cap would only account for 10% of immigration flow to the U.S. and would allow one refugee for every 4,000 Americans,^[12] small numbers compared to those of countries like Canada, France and Australia. The bill was adopted by the Senate by a unanimous vote on September 6, 1979, and remained essentially intact until it was signed in 1980.

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