The left now admits that they don’t want E-verify because it will deny criminal employers from having their illegal workers.

Facebooktwittermail

NumbersUSA.com

 

This Issue: Supreme Court overturns injunction that halted new ‘public charge’ rules on green cards. But Dallas Federal Reserve encourages illegal hiring.
Fri, Jan 31 th

It can be easy to get frustrated with missed opportunities for immigration reform. Even “low-hanging fruit,” like the implementation of mandatory E-Verify (recommended by the Jordan Commission in 1997!) , has been stymied by narrow special interests who profit from the status quo.

Consider this:
This week the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank released a working paper arguing that E-Verify makes it more difficult for criminal employers who hire illegal aliens to profit from their crimes. But because of that, the paper’s authors wrote, mandating E-Verify would be a bad move in that it “would be incompatible with the current reliance on a large unauthorized workforce.”

Liberal commentator Mickey Kaus reacted to the Dallas Fed paper by asking “ISN’T THAT THE POINT” of E-Verify?

Of course that’s the point, and the authors of the Fed paper understand that. Their point is that the federal government should continue to allow employers to violate the law because hiring unauthorized workers is good for their — the criminal employers’– bottom line.

[E]mployers in industries that relied more on unauthorized workers, such as agriculture, construction, and accommodations and food services, appeared to be more reluctant to sign up [for E-Verify] than employers in industries where there were few such workers…. Employment and output growth would likely be slower in sectors and areas where unauthorized immigrants are concentrated, at least in the short run.

There you have it. The meaning is plain even if it is not written in plain English:
Employers who hire illegal workers don’t want to be forced to use E-Verify because it will prevent them from breaking the law and will result in a short-term reduction in profit margins.

That’s what’s so frustrating about these kind of “elites” (we’ve got to come up with another word for these folks). They not only promote the displacement and impoverishment of American workers, they also brazenly advocate on behalf of criminal employers.
If there’s one thing we’ve learned over the years (and this is a lesson that extends beyond the fight for immigration reform) is that frustration should not lead to defeatism. We’ve won a lot of battles over the years. Just think where we’d be if the Gang of Eight bill had passed in 2013.

One battle won this week, for the mean time at least, was the Supreme Court ruling that allowed the Trump Administration to implement its public charge rule. Public charge laws have been on the books for over a century, and the administration is seeking to bring the rule up to date to reduce the admittance of immigrants who will rely on taxpayer-funded public benefits — 63% of foreign-born headed households use at least one welfare program, according to an analysis of Census Bureau date by the Center for Immigration Studies.

While the Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the administration’s public charge rule, it did lift a nation-wide injunction that had been imposed by a lower court. This is important because so many of the actions the Trump Administration has taken on immigration have been blocked by federal judges hostile to the President’s polices — and to the laws passed by Congress.

The President has a good track record at the Supreme Court, and that will likely continue with the cases still being contested. The strategy of the open borders lobby, however, is less to ultimately win the legal argument, but to block the Administration in court for as long as possible to try and hold out for an administration friendly to their goals.

Justice Gorsuch issued a scathing criticism of the practice of lower court judges issuing national injunctions on flimsy premises. Hopefully, this signals the Justices will be less tolerant of activist judges going forward.

In any event, the Trump Administration is now free to implement a policy that will protect American taxpayers.

Eric Ruark, Director of Research

Action
Have you checked your Action Board for messages you can send to Congress recently?

Talk of the impeachment trial may be dominating the airwaves, but you can still urge Pres. Trump to reduce legal immigration, and to let your member of Congress know how important it is to pass mandatory E-Verify.

Urge them to put American workers first!

Action Board
Grade Cards
We’ve added several actions to our Congressional Immigration-Reduction Gradthis week, including adding grades for the two spending bills that were passed at the end of last year.

Please take a moment to see where your three Members of Congress stand by clicking on this blue button.

Grade Cards
PREZ CANDIDATES

With the Presidential caucuses and primaries beginning in February, let’s take a look at where the most popular presidential candidates for 2020 stand on preventing future border surges and asylum fraud.

These are the ratings currently assigned by the Grading Team on NumbersUSA’s “WORKER PROTECTION IMMIGRATION GRADE CARDS”:

DETER BORDER SURGES?

Trump — STRONG YES
Biden — Leans YES
Bloomberg — No Position

Buttigieg — Mixed
Klobuchar — Mostly NO

Sanders — STRONG NO
Warren — Mostly NO
Yang — Leans YES

And do these candidates support the Dallas Federal Reserve suggestion that mandating E-Verify would be a bad move because it would deprive outlaw employers of hiring outlaw workers?

MANDATE E-VERIFY?

Trump — No Position
Biden — No Position
Bloomberg — Leans YES

Buttigieg — Leans YES Klobuchar — Mostly NO

Sanders — Leans Yes Warren — No Position
Yang — Mostly NO

To review the specific statements and actions that earned those ratings, click on the candidate’s photo on the Candidate Grade Card.

Feature
Order our fold-over Population/Immigration Cards

If you would like to receive a half-dozen of these fold-over cards, please complete this form.

USCIS Announces Public Charge Rule Implementation
Fri, Jan 31 th

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will implement the Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds final rule (“Final Rule”) on Feb. 24, 2020, except for in the State of Illinois where the rule remains enjoined by a federal court as of Jan. 30, 2020.

2018 Report on Non-immigrant Students in US

Thu, Jan 30 th
The Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP), part of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), released a report Wednesday detailing the nonimmigrant student population.

Koch Network Pushes DACA Amnesty and Welcoming ‘Anyone Who Will Contribute’

Thu, Jan 30 th
The billionaire, pro-mass immigration Koch network is gearing up for a full-fledged lobbying campaign to push lawmakers to pass an amnesty for up to 3.5 million illegal aliens enrolled or eligible for former President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

Company Agrees To Pay Gov. $3M After Employing Illegal Aliens
Mon, Jan 27 th

North Texas construction company Speed Fab Crete will pay the government $3 million for its role in a scheme to employ illegal aliens. Five individuals pleaded guilty in connection with the crime.

SCOTUS Allows Trump to Enforce Public Charge Rule
Mon, Jan 27 th

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday to approve the Trump administration’s Public Charge rule for new immigrants. The justices approved the rule by a vote of 5-4 along ideological lines.

 

Facebooktwittermail