When a major newspaper publishes an opinion piece from an ostensibly authoritative source who reduces a fraught policy issue to tendentious shambles, that paper does a disservice to its readers and to the policy debate. The hatchet job recently published by the Washington Post regarding the most prominent immigration restrictionist organizations should not have passed editorial muster.
On November 9, 2018, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) adopted an interim final rule that bars aliens from receiving asylum if they are subject to a presidential proclamation suspending or limiting entry into the United States across the Mexican border.
Now that the Ninth Circuit has finally issued its decision, the path would appear to be clear for the Supreme Court to hear the case. It is time for the Supreme Court to act on this issue, once and for all.
With the likely House Judiciary Committee chair's immigration-reduction grade falling from an A to an F-, and the likely Senate chair's dropping from an A to a D+, the struggle for immigration reform will become much more difficult.
After a decade of litigation, the courts have still not decided the legal question underlying the Optional Practical Training program: Are former foreign students, who have graduated and are working full-time, still students?
It is critical that EOIR tightly target immigration-court resources to ensure that immigration judges are sent where they are actually needed. This will require intelligence assistance from DOJ, DHS, and (likely) the Department of Defense.
Much of the criticism of Soros has been unfounded in its conspiratorial excesses and blatant anti-Semitism. Some is worthy of consideration as a window into the discussion of important questions in the national immigration debate.