ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network




Connect to us

Make us Homepage



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
© 1995-
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM


  1. We don't need a terrorist attack to know diversity program has to go. By Nolan Rappaport

    © Getty

    A few days ago, a 29-year-old terrorist drove a rented pickup truck down a busy bicycle path in New York City, killing eight people and injuring a dozen more. The terrorist, a native of Uzbekistan, came to the United States in 2010 through the Diversity Visa Program (program) according to press reports. Uzbekistan is a large, majority-Muslim country located north of Afghanistan.

    The next day, President Donald Trump said he wants congress to terminate the program.

    Trump is not the first to want to end this program, and it is not just a partisan desire. The bipartisan Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, S.744, that the Senate passed in 2013 would have ended the program if it had not been rejected on other grounds in the House.

    S.744 was introduced by “the Gang of 8,” which included Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.); Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), author of the original DREAM Act; and Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

    What is the Diversity Visa Program?


    Published originally on The Hill.

    About the author. Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years.

    Updated 11-03-2017 at 10:27 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  2. Trump, Echoing Hitler, Condemns Courts as Too Weak to Deal With NYC Terror Attack and Tries to Undermine Independent Justice System. Roger Algase

    Comparing Trump to Adolf Hitler is something that should only be done with great caution and as an absolute last resort by anyone responsible observer who is concerned with the facts, rather than invective and sensationalism for its own sake It is a comparison that should be used only in extreme circumstances, where there is a clear and present danger to democracy.

    Unlike Hitler, Donald Trump is not a mass murderer; he does not bear any animus toward the Jewish people; he does not want to conquer the world; he does not subscribe to Hitler's extreme theories of racial superiority; he does not have a private group of thugs or police force such as Hitler's SA or Gestapo; and he has not (yet) sent anyone to a concentration camp (despite having pardoned Joe Arpiao, who boasted about his own "concentration camps" for Hispanic immigrants).

    However, with a great deal of reluctance and qualification, I am compelled to make the above comparison by Trump's continuing reaction to the New York City terror attack by a lone wolf radicalized Muslim immigrant whom Trump himself quite accurately called as "deranged", and Trump's attempt to use this attack as a vehicle for exploiting hatred toward minority immigrants in order to undermine the rule of law and destroy American democracy.

    In my comment in the November 2 Immigration Daily, I focused on Trump's attempt to use this horrendous attack which killed 8 innocent people, six of whom were foreign visitors to the US, and spread horror and terror throughout Lower Manhattan, where thousands of children were getting ready to celebrate Halloween, as an instrument of promoting a white supremacist immigration agenda - including support for abolishing the Diversity visa and enacting the Eurocentric RAISE Act.

    Today, I will focus on the other side of the coin of Trump's anti-immigrant attacks - namely the acute threat to America's democracy raised (no pun intended) by Trump's assault on the judicial system, which is the cornerstone of the freedoms that define the essence of America and what it means to be an American.

    In this regard, there is no choice except to point out the clear and unmistakable comparison with Trump's statements about our judicial system and Hitler's assault on the judiciary after taking power in Germany.

    I refer to Trump's comment about the upcoming prosecution of the terror "suspect", Saipov, following up on Trump's previous threat to send him to Guantanamo, which is the nearest thing that America has to a concentration camp (so far): POLITICO reports Trump as saying the following about prosecuting Saipov through America's regular system of justice in the federal courts:

    "We need quick justice and we need strong justice - much quicker and stronger than we have right now. Because what we have right now is a joke and it's a laughingstock. And no wonder so much of this stuff takes place."

    The last sentence is the most ominous of all, as it in effect blames the courts for "so much of this stuff", i.e. terror attacks. This is also not the first time that Trump has made this accusation, as shown in his reactions to the unfavorable court decisions concerning his Muslim ban executive orders.

    But the above statement as a whole is straight out of Adolf Hitler, who called democracy itself a joke. This is how the US Holocaust Memorial Museum describes Hitler's attitude toward the courts in reaction to the Reichstag Fire attack in 1933 by another "lone wolf" assailant, which Hitler blamed on Jews and political opponents, just as Trump is making more than a million mainly Asian and African Diversity Green card beneficiaries scapegoats for the New York Halloween terror attack:

    "Hitler determined to increase the political reliability of the courts. In 1933 he established special courts throughout Germany to try politically sensitive cases. Dissatisfied with the 'not guilty' verdicts rendered by the Supreme Court (Reichsgericht) in the Reichstag fire trial, Hitler ordered the creation of the People's Courts (Volksgerichthof) in Berlin in 1934 to try treason and other important 'political' cases."

    And what kind of justice did Hitler's special courts provide? The USHMM continues:

    "...the People's Court became part of the Nazi system of terror, condemning ten of thousands of people as 'Folk Vermin' and thousands more to death for 'Volk Treason'."

    To be sure, Trump has already, without any trial yet taking place, called for the death penalty for only one person, and no one can dispute that this might be entirely justified if a court of justice so rules after affording the terror suspect the due process which our legal system provides.

    But the death penalty is not the issue here - the issue is whether America will continue to have a system of justice that is not dependent solely on the will of Donald Trump, just the German courts depended on the will of their Fuehrer.

    Trump's use of the New York attack in service of his agenda of exploiting fear and hatred against not only Muslim, but all minority immigrants; and as an excuse for his assault on America's entire system of justice, comes straight out of Adolf Hitler's playbook. No one who cares about preserving America's democracy can ignore this comparison.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 11-03-2017 at 08:23 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: