On Wednesday, President Donald Trump endorsed a bill, introduced by Senators Tom Cotton (R-AK) and David Perdue (R-GA) in February, which would halve the number of legal immigrants coming to the U.S.

The RAISE Act would cap the number of green cards the U.S. issues at 50,000 over the next 10 years. Currently, the U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services awards about one million green cards each year; about six million individuals and employers apply for a green card each year.

Green cards grant legal immigrants the right to permanently reside and work in the country, instead of having to apply and constantly renew work visas.

Inspired by the Canadian and Australian immigration policies, the proposed legislation would establish a competitive “merit-based system,” through which applicants would be awarded points based on a slew of factors. Some of the factors would include an applicant’s financial stability, ability to pay for healthcare, earning prospects, and, most controversially, English language skills.

The RAISE ACT “puts great downward pressure on people who work with their hands and work on their feet,” Cotton said. “Now, for some people, they may think that that’s a symbol of America’s virtue and generosity. I think it’s a symbol that we’re not committed to working-class Americans. And we need to change that.”

The bill also removes the diversity visa program and “chain migration,” the current practice of prioritizing family unity in the immigration process.

I campaigned on creating a merit-based immigration system that protects U.S. workers & taxpayers. Watch: https://t.co/lv3ScSKnF6 #RAISEAct pic.twitter.com/zCFK5OfYnB

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 2, 2017

“American First” 

This announcement comes on the heels of the Senate’s failure to repeal and replace Obamacare. Many equate this push for legal immigration reform to the administration trying to turn the page on healthcare and secure its first legislative win.

Trump campaigned on reforming immigration, legal and illegal, but several of his initiatives have either run into road-blocks or devolved into large-scale media disasters. Trump’s promised wall along the Mexican border remains unbuilt, and the attempted Muslim ban was stopped in court a number of times earlier this year.

However, Trump’s “America first” message remains at the forefront of his policies and his endorsement of this bill further highlights this.

“The RAISE Act prevents new migrants and new immigrants from collecting welfare, and protects U.S. workers from being displaced,” Trump said. “And that’s a very big thing. They’re not going to come in and just immediately go and collect welfare. That doesn’t happen under the RAISE Act. They can’t do that.”

Uphill Battle in Congress 

The bill is very unlikely to pass Congress, as it would need unified Republican support as well as some Democratic votes. Some Republicans have already said they would not support the bill. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) released a statement on Wednesday, saying that he agrees with the ideas expressed in the bill, but he would not vote in favor of the legislation.

“South Carolina’s number one industry is agriculture and tourism is number two,” Graham said. “If this proposal were to become law, it would be devastating to our state’s economy, which relies on this immigrant workforce.”

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) also cast doubt on his colleagues’ bill. “I think you have to consider that we do want high-tech people, but we also need low-skilled people who will do work that Americans won’t do,” he said. “I wouldn’t do it. Even in my misspent youth, I wouldn’t do it.”

Strong Reactions 

While many Trump advocates support the policy proposal, the bill is drawing significant criticism from economists, citizens, and immigrants.

“Dramatically reducing overall immigration levels won’t raise the standard of living for Americans,” said Randy Johnson, senior vice president for labor, immigration, and employee benefits at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “In fact, it will likely accomplish the opposite, making it harder for businesses, communities, and our overall economy to grow, prosper, and create jobs for American workers.”

Some see the RAISE Act as focusing too much on making sure Americans in low-wage jobs don’t face competition from immigrants, instead of investing in those same Americans so that they may obtain higher paying jobs.

It's interesting that outside of immigration policy, nobody ever proposes giving strict priority to the interests of high school dropouts.

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) August 3, 2017

Others object to the limits the bill would place on bringing in grandparents or extended family members to the U.S. Under the bill, people like First Lady Melania Trump, a non-native English speaker, would have a tough time getting permanent residency.

“What the president is proposing here does not sound like it’s in keeping with American tradition when it comes to immigration,” CNN’s Jim Acosta said during a White House press conference. “The Statue of Liberty says, ‘Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.’ It doesn’t say anything about speaking English or being a computer programmer.”

In his response to Acosta’s question, Stephen Miller, Trump’s policy adviser, said: “The poem that you’re referring to was added later, [and] is not actually part of the original Statue of Liberty.”

Celia Heudebourg

Celia Heudebourg is an editorial intern for Law Street Media. She is from Paris, France and is entering her senior year at Macalester College in Minnesota where she studies international relations and political science. When she’s not reading or watching the news, she can be found planning a trip abroad or binge-watching a good Netflix show. Contact Celia at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Backs Bill to Slash Legal Immigration, Introduce “Merit-Based” System appeared first on Law Street.

At almost 5 p.m. on Friday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order, a travel ban, restricting entry to the United States. It has been dubbed by many a “Muslim ban” because of the countries it singles out and Trump’s consistent campaign promises to that effect. Chaos reigned Friday night and into Saturday, as permanent U.S. residents from those seven countries who were traveling abroad were prevented from returning home, protests were launched at numerous domestic airports, and late last night, a federal judge stayed the order for individuals with valid visas who are already in transit or being held in the U.S.

What does the Order Say?

The order is in almost every way a unilateral move by President Trump. It prevents citizens of seven countries–Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen–from entering the U.S. for 90 days. There are some narrow exceptions, but they’re limited mainly to diplomats. The order heavily invokes memories of 9/11, despite the fact that none of the countries listed were ever tied to those attacks.

Refugees, from any nation, are banned for 120 days. And per the executive order, Syrian refugees are banned indefinitely. When refugees are allowed back in, Christian refugees will be prioritized. According to the order:

Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.

Despite claims from the Trump Administration that this is not a “Muslim ban” Rudy Giuliani claims that Trump asked him how to legally create a “Muslim ban.”

Giuliani admits Trump asked him how to “do a Muslim ban legally.” So they focused on nationality. Start at 3:00. https://t.co/9orjNwQBGy

— Evan McMullin (@Evan_McMullin) January 29, 2017

For a closer look at the order, check out an annotated version by the New York Times.

How Does it Work in Practice?

It’s very unclear how this order is supposed to work, and from the second it was signed, it sparked confusion. Reportedly, the Department of Homeland Security–the department that has to implement it–was not consulted until right before the order was signed. Certain norms, like consulting the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, appear to have not been undertaken. And once the order was signed, the Department of Homeland Security’s legal understanding of how to deal with it was allegedly overridden by Trump’s chief strategist Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller, a top policy aide. The “two Steves” insisted that legal permanent residents, also known as green card holders, from the listed countries be stopped from re-entering the U.S.

That implementation began. People who are legal permanent residents from the seven countries and had left the U.S. for whatever reason–students, individuals visiting family, vacationers–were restricted from coming back in to the U.S. Protests swelled at airports:

“No hate, no fear, Muslims are welcome here”

— Protests at JFK airport where people have been detained after Trump’s executive order pic.twitter.com/SvXba2C0r5

— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) January 28, 2017

The #MuslimBan airport protests. #NoBanNoWall #Resist @realDonaldTrump @POTUS pic.twitter.com/Ulw8xcOARN

— Maxim Dmitriev (@max_dmitriev07) January 29, 2017

Airport protests at #JFK, #LAX, #SFO, Dulles, O’Hare and growing. #NoMuslimBan #NoBanNoWall #RefugeesWelcome #ResistOften pic.twitter.com/OZZ9dexGXo

— Mike Hudema (@MikeHudema) January 28, 2017

Lawyers began suing to block the order, and last night Judge Ann M. Donnelly of the Federal District Court in Brooklyn ruled that the government cannot hold legal residents who are already in the U.S., or restrict those who are in transit from entering. This still leaves a lot of people in flux, and the legal battles are sure to continue. In the meantime, the Department of Homeland Security said it would continue to comply with Trump’s directives.

National Outrage

The ban was immediately met with outrage.

We will not allow a Muslim ban in the United States of America. Here’s what I said at Logan Airport tonight. #NoBanNoWall pic.twitter.com/XqeS9Iy14e

— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) January 29, 2017

If you do support the #MuslimBan today, remember this: you will be remembered as the villains of our children’s history books tomorrow.

— Wajahat Ali (@WajahatAli) January 28, 2017

I want to repeat: Green card holders were handcuffed, their social media was reviewed, and they were asked their views on Trump#MuslimBan

— Trita Parsi (@tparsi) January 28, 2017

It’s unclear what’s next. But the outrage is warranted–this is an unprecedented move on the part of the Trump Administration. It separates families. It screams isolationism and bigotry. It’s likely unconstitutional. And for many, it’s a nightmare.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Confusion, Chaos, and Court Orders: What’s Going on With Trump’s Travel Ban? appeared first on Law Street.

In California, an undocumented immigrant who goes to college, law school, and passes the bar now has the ability to be granted a law license.

It’s all because of a young man named Sergio C. Garcia. He was brought to the United States for the first time when he was just over a year old, and spent his childhood going back and forth from California and Mexico. He moved permanently to California at 17. He was brought by his father, who already had a green card. Garcia was approved for a green card himself by state officials, and told that he would receive one when it became available to him.

He then waited for 19 years for that green card. He put that time he waited to good use. He worked his way through college and law school, and then passed the state bar exam. Now 36, he wants to be a lawyer in the country he has called home for almost two decades. Garcia stated, “I am 36 years old. This is the home I know. This is the country I know. And this is the country I want to work for and fight for.”

When Garcia first passed the bar, there were laws in California that allowed anyone to become a lawyer who had some sort of legal standing–including a student visa or a green card. But because Garcia had never actually physically received a green card, the Justice Department claimed he didn’t qualify. And there is federal law that precludes an undocumented immigrant from being admitted to the bar. A former prosecutor with the state bar named Larry DeSha explained the position of those who did not want to admit Garcia, stating,

He can’t say he is going to fulfill his duties as attorney when one of those duties is to uphold all federal laws, when he’s here illegally. And no one can administer the oath to him knowing he’s going to be illegal the minute he puts his hand down. And the other thing is clients can’t pay him money. And any client who finds out that he is illegal has to fire him under federal law.

Garcia’s case eventually made it to the state Supreme Court. It was at that point that Gov. Jerry Brown and the California legislature passed the law allowing Garcia and those like him to receive their law licenses. This new law went into effect officially on January 1, 2014.

Yesterday, the State Supreme Court ruled that under this new law, Garcia is allowed to receive his law license and officially begin to practice law in his home state of California. The decision by the Court was unanimous. As a result of the new California law, the court wrote, “we conclude there is no state law or state public policy that would justify precluding undocumented immigrants, as a class from obtaining a law license in California.”

The decision has been praised by many. A spokesperson for California Attorney General Kamala Harris exclaimed that California’s success, “has hinged on the hard work and self-sufficiency of immigrants like Sergio.”

This California case may set a strong precedent. Similar cases are up for play in Florida and New York. This story out of California is an interesting twist in American immigration rights and law as the federal government remains essentially deadlocked.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Ed Uthman via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Welcome California’s Newest Lawyer: Sergio C. Garcia appeared first on Law Street.