Trump Disapproval Of Immigration Grows Wider

The chart above reflects the results of the Washington Post / ABC News / Ipsos Poll -- done between February 12th and 17th of a nationwide sample of 2,589 adults, with a 2.2 point margin of error. 

Trump Continues To Lose Support For His Immigration Activities

 

The charts above are from the Reuters / Ipsos Poll -- done between January 23rd and 25th of a nationwide sample of 1,117 adults, with a 3 point margin of error.

Voters Don't Like The Way The Trump Administration Is Handling Immigration

 

The charts above are from the Navigator Poll -- done between January 29th and February 1st of a nationwide sample of 1,000 registered voters, with a 3.1 point margin of error.

"Melania" Movie Is An Obscenity Perpetuating The Myth Of The Good Immigrant

The following is by Inae Oh in Mother Jones:

Melania is more revelatory in its world-historical vapidness than it might seem. Consider that Melania appears to go out of her way to foreground her journey from Slovenian immigrant to American first lady, a story she says serves as “a reminder of why I respect this nation so deeply.” Similarly, the film gives rare space to the immigrants in Melania’s inner circle, including her chief interior designer, Tham Kannalikham, who opens up about her journey from Laos to now decorating the White House, as well as Melania’s father, who is seen beaming with pride in his American daughter. Absent in Viktor Knavs’ film debut is the context of the “chain migration” pathway through which he and his late wife became US citizens, the very same policy targeted by their son-in-law.

“Everyone should do what they can to protect our individual rights,” Melania says at one point. “Never take them for granted, because in the end, no matter where we come from, we are bound by the same humanity.”

What an obscenity to hear this woman employ the language of shared humanity, as the Trump administration kills Americans and systematically kidnaps immigrants and their children. But as galling as they were, the remarks were instructive of both how Melania views her American story and the same anti-immigrant sentiments with which some, in order to prove that they belong here, yank the ladder up from newcomers seeking the same opportunities. Such immigrants, like Melania, cast themselves as the “good immigrant” who came here the “right way.” But the first lady appears to do this despite reports, including our own, that she may have initially been working here without a visa. In other words, she may have violated immigration law. Meanwhile, the immigrants Melania now surrounds herself with, like Tham, are props for that very narrative—with zero mention of her husband’s endless cruelty. But why would there be in a piece of abject propaganda—backed by one of the richest men in the world as he prepares to gut the Washington Post—that many crew members asked not to be credited on?

As a purely cinematic experience, Melania, a ghastly parade of fun-house mirror herstory, will certainly be relegated to the footnotes of her family’s deeper atrocities.

About 51% Support Deportation Policy - BUT NOT HOW TRUMP IS DOING IT!

 

The charts above are from the YouGov Poll -- done between January 26th and 28th of a nationwide sample of 1,124 adults, with a 4 point margin of error.

Americans Don't Like How Trump Is Handling Immigration

 

The charts above are from the Reuters / Ipsos Poll -- done between January 23rd and 25th of a nationwide sample of 1,139 adults, with a 3 point margin of error.

Trump's Numbers Just Keep Getting Worse

 

These charts are from the AP / NORC Poll -- done between December 4th and 8th of a nationwide sample of 1,146 adults, with a 4 point margin of error.

A Majority Oppose The Way Trump Is Handling Immigration

The chart above reflects the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between October 4th and 6th of a nationwide sample of 1,648 adults (including 1,490 registered voters). The margin of error is 3.4 points for adults and 3.1 points for registered voters.

 

Public Is Turning Against Trump's Immigration Policy

 

The charts above are from the CBS News / YouGov Poll -- done between July 16th and 18th of a nationwide sample of 2,343 adults, with a 2.5 point margin of error.

Poll Shows The Concern Over Immigrants Has Abated

 

The charts above are from the Gallup Poll -- done between June 2nd and 26th of a nationwide sample of 1,402 adults, with a 4 point margin of error.

Americans Generally Oppose Trump's Immigration Actions

 

The charts above are from the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between May 16th and 19th of a nationwide sample of 1,710 adults, with a 3 point margin of error.

Republicans Want U.S. Women To Have More (White) Children

Last year the average number of births to women in the United States was about 1.62. That was a slight increase of about 1%. But no one expects the rate to continue increasing, and that rate is still far below the number needed just to maintain the current population (2.1 per woman). And it has been many years since the U.S. had a 2.1 or better rate.

So, how has the U.S. population kept increasing? Immigration! 

But Republicans don't want immigrants entering this country. Most immigrants are non-white, and Republicans want to keep the country with a white majority. That's why they are allowing Trump to conduct his war on (mainly non-white) immigrants.

Republicans think if they cut off immigration and convince American women to have more children, they can delay (or eliminate) the time when the U.S. becomes a majority non-white population. And they are trying to come up with ideas to induce American women to have more babies.

One of the ideas is to give women a $5,000 check for each baby born. Evidently, they think American women are stupid. That $5,000 is only a tiny fraction of what it takes to raise a child in the United States - around $200,000.

Another idea is to give women who have at least six children a medal. Does anyone (except a brain dead Republican) really think any woman would have six children just to get a medal?

These ludicrous ideas wouldn't work anyway. Note the chart above. White women have a lower child birth rate than any other racial group (about 50 per 1,000 women). Even if immigration was completely eliminated, the white population would continue to diminish with each passing year.

If they were smart, Republicans would alter their policies to help all races flourish in this country - and help all families to meet societal needs. I doubt that will happen - too many Republicans cling to the racist dream of a continuing white majority.

Whether Republicans want to admit it or not, we need immigration. Immigrants keep our population stable, do jobs Americans don't want, pay billions in taxes, and contribute to this country in many other ways.

We are a nation built on immigration - and cutting off new immigrant arrivals is a stupid idea that will never work!

Most Say Abrego Garcia Should Be Returned To The U.S.

The chart above reflects the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between April 19th and 22nd of a nationwide sample of 1,625 adults (including 1,446 registered voters). The margin of error for both groups is 3.3 points. 

The chart above is from the Washington Post / ABC News Poll -- done between April 18th and 22nd of a nationwide sample of 2,464 adults, with a 2 point margin of error.

Views On Immigration/Deportation From The Yale Youth Poll

 

The charts above are from the Yale Youth Poll -- done between April 1st and 3rd of a nationwide sample of 4,100 registered voters (including 2,025 under 30). The margin of error for all adults is 1.9 points, and for the youth sample is 1.8 points.

Trump/Musk Have Two Immigrant Agendas And Both Are Wrong

Trump spent the campaign talking about mass deportations of undocumented immigrants. He claimed they are criminals who take the jobs Americans could have. Both claims are nonsense. 

Undocumented immigrants commit crimes at a much lower rate than American citizens do. They are mainly refugees who come for their safety and desperate people who just want to provide for their families. And they eagerly take the low-paying, dangerous, and dirty jobs that citizens shun. In doing those jobs, they provide a service to this country.

And they boost the economy - both by spending much of the money they make to buy products from U.S. businesses and by paying over $7 billion in taxes (while getting no benefits from the government).

But that is only part of the Trump/Musk immigrant agenda. They want to increase the number of immigrants entering on H-1B visas. Those visas are used by U.S. corporations to import skilled workers. They claim they need those workers. They don't!

They import those foreign workers because of greed! They can pay them less because the workers want to come to this country and the visa will allow them to enter. If the worker then tries to join a union or ask for better pay or working conditions, the corporation can just cancel their contract and have them deported.

These are the jobs that American workers would love to have, but corporations would have to pay them the prevailing wage and allow them to unionize if they wanted. And there is NOT a shortage of Americans skilled enough for these jobs.

They are deporting the workers we need and importing the workers we don't need!

ISN'T THIS BACKWARDS? DON'T BOTH OF THESE MISGUIDED AGENDAS HURT THE COUNTRY AND ITS WORKERS?

Trump Wants To Eliminate Birthright Citizenship - Can He Do It?

 The following is part of a post at PolitiFact.com by Louis Jacobson:

During his first major interview since winning the 2024 presidential race, Donald Trump reiterated a promise he’s made multiple times: He will try to eliminate birthright citizenship, the longstanding practice of conferring citizenship on anyone born in the United States, even when the parents are noncitizens. 

Birthright citizenship’s legal underpinnings

The notion of birthright citizenship can be traced to 1608 with Calvin’s Case, a British decision that became part of the common law adopted in the U.S. legal system’s early days. Calvin’s Case granted subjectship — a British concept that has since evolved into citizenship — to all children born in Scotland except those of diplomats and enemy troops in hostile occupation.

Three key pieces of legal precedent underpin birthright citizenship, scholars say.

First, there’s the 14th Amendment, which says that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

This amendment, ratified in 1868, "was unquestionably intended to cover the children of unauthorized migrants, namely the children of enslaved persons brought here by criminals after the prohibition of the slave trade," said Gabriel (Jack) Chin, a University of California, Davis, law professor.

Second, there’s the 1898 Supreme Court decision known as the Wong Kim Ark case. Wong Kim Ark, a laborer, was born in 1873 in San Francisco. His parents were Chinese and lived legally in the United States. 

Around age 17, Wong left to visit China and returned to the United States without incident. Then, around age 21, he left again to visit China, but at the end of that trip, he was denied reentry to the United States because the collector of customs argued he was not a U.S. citizen. (This was no small distinction — it was the era of anti-Asian strictures known as the Chinese Exclusion Act.)

In its 6-2 majority decision, the Supreme Court’s justices ruled that Wong — and others born on United States soil, with a few clear exceptions — qualified for citizenship under the 14th Amendment.

"The Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens. … The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States," the court’s majority wrote in its decision.

Third, there’s a 1952 statute (8 U.S. Code § 1401) that echoes the 14th Amendment’s language . "The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: (a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," the statute partly reads.

Peter J. Spiro, a Temple University Law School professor, said a strong argument for continuing birthright citizenship is that "that's how we've done it for more than a century now. The historical practice is well entrenched: The children of undocumented parents have always been extended birth citizenship. The practice has been uniform and, until recently, uncontested."

Birthright citizenship also includes people born abroad to U.S. citizens, but Trump has not indicated he would target that provision.

Could birthright citizenship be overturned by executive order?

The notion that an executive order could overturn birthright citizenship is dubious, legal experts said.

"If it's mandated by the Constitution, it can only be undone by a constitutional amendment," Spiro said. "If it's mandated by statute, it can only be undone by a subsequent statute. It's only if it's mandated by neither that (a president) could do it by executive order."

The most Trump could do on his own is sign an executive order with the expectation that opponents would sue to block its implementation, University of Pennsylvania law professor Kermit Roosevelt said. Then, birthright citizenship’s fate would be in the courts’ hands, potentially all the way up to the Supreme Court.

The president would effectively be "offering his interpretation" in an executive order, and this "tees up the lawsuit that will get the Supreme Court to rule, once and for all, what it means," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that generally supports tighter immigration.

Stephen Yale-Loehr, a Cornell Law School professor specializing in immigration law, said that while the Supreme Court generally defers to presidents on immigration matters because they involve sovereignty and foreign affairs, "I don’t see how even this Supreme Court would allow a president to revoke a constitutional amendment through an executive order. Such a ruling would endanger all constitutional amendments."

Poll Shows Public Willing To Back Trump On Economy And Immigration

 

The charts above are from the CBS News / YouGov Poll -- done between November 19th and 22nd of a nationwide sample of 2,232 adults, with a 2.3 point margin of error.