RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2020/03/24/this-crisis-vindicates-trumps-america-with-borders/

Coronavirus and its awful toll may be ending a second American holiday from history, one in which we entertained boutique notions like a world without borders and all the existential risks that come with it.

Great leaders, history has taught us, are often vilified in their own time and later exonerated as events vindicate their warnings. Churchill warned about the Nazi war machine when “peace in our time” was briefly fashionable. Reagan outraged the political class when he said that Soviet communism should be defeated, not contained. Similarly, events are already vindicating Donald Trump for his stand that national borders matter.

Since Trump descended the escalator in the summer of 2015, he has argued that a nation must protect itself from outside threats. Those threats could include violent criminals, drug smugglers, human traffickers, and, as it happens, infectious diseases. For this and other apostasies, Trump’s opponents have all but anointed him the Prince of Darkness.

It took a global health crisis for the world to come around to Trump’s position. Borders are suddenly relevant again. Countries that once embraced globalism are now following Trump’s lead and protecting their borders. Allowing citizens of the world to enter a country with little or no scrutiny now seems like a quaint, naïve position of a bygone era.

The borders issue is not think-tank fodder—it is now a matter of life or death.

On January 31, the administration announced that it would temporarily bar foreigners from entering the United States if they had been to China within the previous 14 days. We may never know how many lives were saved by that action. Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) credited this decision at the time for being “the single most consequential and valuable thing” done to combat coronavirus.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-allows-rem

The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the Trump administration’s “Remain in Mexico” policy requiring asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their applications are processed in the U.S.

The court’s decision overturns a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals injunction against the policy covering the entire U.S.-Mexico border. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only judge who dissented. However, the ruling does not dispel other legal challenges currently brought against the policy in other courts.

The Remain in Mexico policy has been touted by the administration as a deterrent to illegal immigration. Around 60,000 asylum seekers are currently enrolled in the program.

Critics charge that it forces migrants to wait in dangerous Mexican border towns. In the 9th Circuit’s injunction, Judge William Fletcher wrote that the policy poses serious harm to migrants.

“[The Migrant Protection Protocols have] had serious adverse consequences for the individual plaintiffs,” Fletcher wrote. “Plaintiffs presented evidence in the district court that they, as well as others returned to Mexico under the MPP, face targeted discrimination, physical violence, sexual assault, overwhelmed and corrupt law enforcement, lack of food and shelter, and practical obstacles to participation in court proceedings in the United States.”

On Thursday the Pentagon announced it would deploy a “crisis force” of around 160 troops at two points on the U.S.-Mexico border, fearing that if the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the 9th Circuit, migrants would try to enter the U.S. en masse.

https://issuesinsights.com/2020/03/04/trumps-immigration-policies-and-border-wall-are-working/

During the 2016 campaign, President Donald Trump ran on cracking down on illegal immigration. After years of border security being largely ignored, Trump made it a central issue. After three years in office, it is clear that he is getting results.

So far, more than 120 miles of border wall have been built, and hundreds of more miles of wall are expected to be built this year. Just last week, Mark Morgan, who leads U.S. Customs and Border Protection, told Congress that one section of border wall had reduced the number of illegal crossings there by more than 80%.

In addition, the administration’s Remain in Mexico policy that keeps asylum claimants in Mexico pending hearings is credited with slowing down migration as illegal border crossings continue to drop. This policy requires asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their immigration court dates; previously, asylum seekers were allowed to wait in the U.S., but many simply disappeared and never reappeared for their court dates.

Thanks to the new policy, in January, the most recent month for which we have official numbers, the number of people apprehended or found to be inadmissible on the Southern border fell to 36,679. In May of last year, that number peaked at 144,116, but it has been declining ever since.

Americans for Limited Government’s Frank McCaffrey has reported from respite centers, bus stops and businesses along migrant routes on both the U.S. and Mexican sides of the border attesting that migrant traffic has slowed as the Remain in Mexico policy took effect.

The two policies, the wall and Remain in Mexico, are the heart of the administration’s success in combating illegal immigration but remain in constant legal wrangling thanks to lawsuits by left-wing organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center and others who are suing to stop the wall and  Remain in Mexico.