ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM

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

Rate this Entry



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?

Read more at http://thehill.com/opinion/immigrati...gram-has-to-go

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.










Submit "We don't need a terrorist attack to know diversity program has to go.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Facebook Submit "We don't need a terrorist attack to know diversity program has to go.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Twitter Submit "We don't need a terrorist attack to know diversity program has to go.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Google Submit "We don't need a terrorist attack to know diversity program has to go.  By Nolan Rappaport" to StumbleUpon Submit "We don't need a terrorist attack to know diversity program has to go.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Reddit Submit "We don't need a terrorist attack to know diversity program has to go.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Digg Submit "We don't need a terrorist attack to know diversity program has to go.  By Nolan Rappaport" to del.icio.us

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

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Diverting DV visas over to make more family and employment-based visas available in other categories is in and of itself not such a horrible idea.

    But that is not what the Trump administration is planning. Instead, Trump wants to make drastic cuts in family immigration by enacting the RAISE Act, and he is also attacking employment-based immigration through the RAISE Act (for less skilled workers) and through his "Buy American, Hire American" executive orders aimed against both skilled and unskilled employment immigration.

    I won't even mentioned the unprecedented number of H-1B RFE's this year, or the new USCIS policy of requiring green card interviews for all employment categories, including the most highly skilled ones, in order to delay and obstruct legal immigration - including highly skilled immigration, a large part of which is from China and India, as much as possible.

    The obvious purpose is to make big reductions in all immigration; and especially, through the RAISE Act, immigration from outside Europe.

    When we talk about ending or cutting back visa programs, whether refugees, Diversity visas, H-1B, family quotas, or whatever, we have to look at the overall picture.

    Just discussing individual parts of the jigsaw puzzle in isolation doesn't tell us very much about the puzzle itself.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 11-03-2017 at 12:30 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  2. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationLawBlogs
    Diverting DV visas over to make more family and employment-based visas available in other categories is in and of itself not such a horrible idea.

    But that is not what the Trump administration is planning. Instead, Trump wants to make drastic cuts in family immigration by enacting the RAISE Act, and he is also attacking employment-based immigration through the RAISE Act (for less skilled workers) and through his "Buy American, Hire American" executive orders aimed against both skilled and unskilled employment immigration.

    I won't even mentioned the unprecedented number of H-1B RFE's this year, or the new USCIS policy of requiring green card interviews for all employment categories, including the most highly skilled ones, in order to delay and obstruct legal immigration - including highly skilled immigration, a large part of which is from China and India, as much as possible.

    The obvious purpose is to make big reductions in all immigration; and especially, through the RAISE Act, immigration from outside Europe.

    When we talk about ending or cutting back visa programs, whether refugees, Diversity visas, H-1B, family quotas, or whatever, we have to look at the overall picture.

    Just discussing individual parts of the jigsaw puzzle in isolation doesn't tell us very much about the puzzle itself.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    I share your concern about what the parties would want a point system to favor, but I am concerned about the Dems, the Republicans, and Trump; not just Trump.

    However, I am most concerned about people who antagonize the politicians before the negotiations start....which is what you tend to do. That does not make them more cooperative.

    Nolan Rappaport
  3. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    I am not a participant in any negotiations. I am only expressing an opinion about what I see as the overall intent and purpose of Trump's immigration agenda, which is also shared by some, but definitely not all, Congressional Republicans, and is opposed by virtually all Congressional Democrats.

    This is not a political blog site; it as a site for comment on substantive immigration issues, and my comments are submitted in that spirit. Any ilw.com readers are free to comment about the substance of my, Nolan's, or any other person's ideas - who might welcome such comments or might not welcome them is not pertinent.

    Moreover, since no one involved in any negotiations is likely ever to read or pay the slightest attention to my views on any immigration topic, Nolan has nothing to worry about when I share my views with other ilw.com readers.

    Also, Nolan's point cuts both ways. If my views are offensive to some immigration opponents, his may also be offensive to some immigration advocates. Is that any reason not to express them?

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 11-03-2017 at 03:29 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  4. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Roger says, “I am not a participant in any negotiations. I am only expressing an opinion about what I see as the overall intent and purpose of Trump's immigration agenda.”

    The way you express your opinion is offensive.

    Roger says, “This is not a political blog site; it as a site for comment on substantive immigration issues,”

    Your comments have some substance by mainly you use pejorative terms and make Nazi Germany comparisons….mixed in with your white supremacy accusations.

    Roger says, “Moreover, since no one involved in any negotiations is likely ever to read or pay the slightest attention to my views on any immigration topic, Nolan has nothing to worry about when I share my views with other ilw.com readers.”

    It’s insulting to Sam and the ILW.com staff to suggest that their readers are people who have no influence over immigration.

    Roger says, “Also, Nolan's point cuts both ways. If my views are offensive to some immigration opponents, his may also be offensive to some immigration advocates. Is that any reason not to express them?”

    I don’t call people names, say they are white supremacists, or compare their views to Hitler, and so on. If you didn’t express yourself that way, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

    Nolan Rappaport
  5. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Picked up a quick example of Roger's offensive remarks glancing at his blog in this issue of ILW.com. He says the following:

    "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."

    Nolan Rappaport
  6. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    I am glad to see that Nolan has focused on my main point, which is that Trump regards not only our country's judicial system, but its entire democratic system of checks and balances, as an irritating nuisance standing in the way of getting whatever he wants. This attitude clearly resembles Adolf Hitler and presents a great danger to our democracy. Under Trump, America is heading toward a fascist dictatorship.

    Certainly there are people who may be offended by this view, as well as by my comments on the white supremacist agenda that forms the core of Trump's immigration policies.

    But the fact that Nolan might not like some of my comments does not make them any less accurate or pertinent.

    Nolan also seems to be afraid that some ID readers who are able to influence immigration policy may pay attention to my comments. I hope he is right. Either way, Immigration Daily is a great and unique publication because it is a forum for all views on immigration and every expression of opinion - including Nolan's.

    As for Trump and Hitler, anyone who knows anything about 20th century history knows that there were many people, even including knowledgeable and responsible Jewish leaders, who did not take Hitler seriously either - who thought he was nothing more than a clown or a buffoon - until it was too late.

    Whenever Nolan has time, he might also want to read the beginning of my comment, where I point out a number of extremely important ways in which Trump is not like Hitler.

    Nolan also mentions immigration negotiations. Of course, this would be a good idea and everyone would hope that this route might be productive .

    But people who have absolute power are not always inclined to negotiate.

    There was once a British prime minister who thought that he could negotiate a deal with Hitler at a place called Munich.

    Someone by he name of Neville Chamberlain

    Nolan talks about negotiating a deal on immigration. As I mention above, this is a great idea. Hopefully this might still be possible, but the more power Trump gets, the less likely it is that there well be negotiations on anything.

    From Day One of his presidency, Trump has been trying to make radical changes in America's immigration system through executive orders, not through negotiations with Congressional leaders.

    (Hopefully, DACA might turn out to be an exception).

    But for the most part, only our independent courts have stopped him from making large parts, of not all, of our immigration system dependent solely on his will.

    No wonder that he has so much hatred and contempt for the courts.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 11-04-2017 at 11:43 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  7. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Funny, but even though I also practicing immigration law back when the predecessor to the Diversity Visa, known as the AA-1 visa lottery, was in effect back in 1992-1994, and only people white majority countries, mainly in Europe, were allowed to apply (with only two exceptions that I can remember - Japan and Indonesia) I don't remember seeing any complaints that this visa should be abolished because it was "random" in nature.

    I don't know how many people remember that visa today, but, as a reminder, it gave heavy preferences to Ireland and Poland in particular, on the theory that the white countries of Europe were "Adversely Affected" (hence "AA") by existing, non-discriminatory, immigration policy.

    Not many people may remember this detail, but the openly the Eurocentric AA-1 lottery visa (and it was advertised this way - no attempt was made at concealing its purpose), included automatic waivers of inadmissibility for both visa fraud and previous deportation!

    How about that for "random" selection!

    Needless to say, the current DV-1 visa, which helps many more immigrants from Africa and Asia than from Europe, contains no such automatic waiver.

    I don't remember seeing any articles at the time by anyone in favor of abolishing the AA-1 visa, which was almost entirely limited to white immigrants and was openly promoted on that basis, If anyone did object to the AA-1 program because it was too "random", or was "not the best way to select immigrants", I would be glad to see the citations.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 11-04-2017 at 02:33 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  8. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Roger, please stop commenting on my articles.
    Nolan Rappaport
    Updated 11-04-2017 at 05:12 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  9. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    ilw.com is a forum for everyone who has a viewpoint on immigration. This includes both those who agree with the opinions expressed in any given article and those who do not agree with those opinions.

    The free and open expression of opinion is, in my view, even more vital as an expression of our democratic values when one is responding to comments on immigration by a leading and well-respected authority on immigration law such as Nolan Rappaport.

    True, in any free and open discussion of an emotional issue such as immigration, some people on both sides are bound to be offended.

    That is part of the debate.

    To change the subject somewhat, anyone who might take offense at my criticism of Trump should be gratified to know that my views about the president are not always negative.

    I heartily congratulate him on the news that USCIS has approved the petitions for 70 H-2B foreign workers to work at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort, despite the fact that they would not have been able to qualify to work in the US under the RAISE Act, which Trump enthusiastically supports; and also despite the fact that according to The Hill (11/4) a local employment agency claims that more than 5,000 US workers were available for these jobs.

    Congratulations, Mr. President!

    Buy American, Hire American!

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law


    Updated 11-05-2017 at 10:49 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  10. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationLawBlogs
    ilw.com is a forum for everyone who has a viewpoint on immigration. This includes both those who agree with the opinions expressed in any given article and those who do not agree with those opinions.

    The free and open expression of opinion is, in my view, even more vital as an expression of our democratic values when one is responding to comments on immigration by a leading and well-respected authority on immigration law such as Nolan Rappaport.

    True, in any free and open discussion of an emotional issue such as immigration, some people on both sides are bound to be offended.

    That is part of the debate.

    To change the subject somewhat, anyone who might take offense at my criticism of Trump should be gratified to know that my views about the president are not always negative.

    I heartily congratulate him on the news that USCIS has approved the petitions for 70 H-2B foreign workers to work at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort, despite the fact that they would not have been able to qualify to work in the US under the RAISE Act, which Trump enthusiastically supports; and also despite the fact that according to The Hill (11/4) a local employment agency claims that more than 5,000 US workers were available for these jobs.

    Congratulations, Mr. President!

    Buy American, Hire American!

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Your comments frequently have nothing to do with the things I say in my articles, and they discourage the free exchange of ideas.

    When you compare Trump to Hitler with your hate-filled condemnations of his immigration policies, you aren't just addressing him. Your condemnations apply to everyone who agrees with his policies.

    And before Trump came on the scene, you were doing the same thing to republicans who want the immigration laws of our countries enforced.

    Sadly though, you aren't the only one who is doing this. The democrats have been relying on ad hominem attacks for a long time now.

    You are destroying the right to free speech by treating people who disagree with you that way.

    Nolan Rappaport


  11. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Nolan is certainly entitled to express his opinion about my comments, just as I am about his.

    And, again with the highest respect for Nolan and his distinguished record of immigration law scholarship and advocacy, I would point out that our discussion is by no means limited to immigration enforcement, important as it is, but also includes proposals to make radical changes in existing immigration laws - such as by promoting the RAISE Act, abolishing the DV lottery - the subject of Nolan's above article - reducing family immigration and refugee admissions, among other proposals - all of which would have their greatest impact on immigration from non-white parts of the world.

    I am advocating in favor of preserving America's legal immigration system essentially as it is (with of course a number of tweaks - such as a lot more H-1B visas - yes we do need more high skilled immigration - and this is a good way to accomplish that without penalizing refugees or immigrants from poorer countries who may not be able to afford a PH.D from Oxford or the University of Paris).

    Whatever negative terms anyone who opposes my views on this may want to use, such individual or individuals are of course free to do so.

    That is what democracy means.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 11-05-2017 at 01:42 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  12. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationLawBlogs
    Nolan is certainly entitled to express his opinion about my comments, just as I am about his.

    And, again with the highest respect for Nolan and his distinguished record of immigration law scholarship and advocacy, I would point out that our discussion is by no means limited to immigration enforcement, important as it is, but also includes proposals to make radical changes in existing immigration laws - such as by promoting the RAISE Act, abolishing the DV lottery - the subject of Nolan's above article - reducing family immigration and refugee admissions, among other proposals - all of which would have their greatest impact on immigration from non-white parts of the world.

    I am advocating in favor of preserving America's legal immigration system essentially as it is (with of course a number of tweaks - such as a lot more H-1B visas - yes we do need more high skilled immigration - and this is a good way to accomplish that without penalizing refugees or immigrants from poorer countries who may not be able to afford a PH.D from Oxford or the University of Paris).

    Whatever negative terms anyone who opposes my views on this may want to use, such individual or individuals are of course free to do so.

    That is what democracy means.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Roger, the difference is that if I am right, your comments are destructively shutting off free discussion, but if I am wrong, I am just wrong.

    Nolan Rappaport
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: