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!
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed


Letters of the Week: November 7 - November 11

Rate this Entry
Please email your letters to or post them directly as a comment below.

Submit "Letters of the Week: November 7 - November 11" to Facebook Submit "Letters of the Week: November 7 - November 11" to Twitter Submit "Letters of the Week: November 7 - November 11" to Google Submit "Letters of the Week: November 7 - November 11" to StumbleUpon Submit "Letters of the Week: November 7 - November 11" to Reddit Submit "Letters of the Week: November 7 - November 11" to Digg Submit "Letters of the Week: November 7 - November 11" to

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags


  1. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Unfortunately, Hillary's election will kill any chance we might otherwise have had at achieving comprehensive immigration reform during the next administration.
    Schumer is wrong; if Hillary Clinton is elected, immigration reform will be impossible.(October 18, 2016),

    Nolan Rappaport
  2. Julian Ortuondo's Avatar
    Endorsing Hillary Clinton is endorsing Democrat's ways. Mr. Obama is an expert in selecting his friends for public offices. Check this: ://, CRITICISM. Due to this populism of Democrats, I WAS BANNED FROM VOTING by Mamet and harassed at the Embassy?s sidewalk just like during Hitler times. Keep voting this and sooner or later America will be lost. Mark my words. God bless America.
  3. ImmigrationDaily's Avatar
    And Obamas Rocket Docket where over 40,000 individuals were deported without representation doesn't bother you. This policy will continue under a Clinton White House.

    - Paul Tallini
  4. ImmigrationDaily's Avatar

    - Joanne Orizal
  5. ImmigrationDaily's Avatar
    I deeply regret not being more proactive on contacting you as you perhaps did not realize that there is a dedicated pro Immigration candidate running on the ballot in all 50 States. He represents also a 45 year old party, the Libertarian Party, whose platform has consistently spoken to the injustice and educated many on the need for drastic reform in immigration. Gary Johnson, the LP candidate, in his many, many talks across the country never neglects speaking out about the terrible immigration system and the need for easily implemented but drastic changes.

    He also would never call Latinos whiny (nor black teenagers Black Predators)as Ms. Clinton did, nor would he ever engage in the terrible rhetoric that Mr. Trump does. Because of his simply good manners, fairness, and honest character, he earned the respect of all ethnicities, religions and races. Johnson represented New Mexico as a two term Governor in a Democrat State yet managed to gain cooperation with all for economic improvement.

    Please do not say you knew of him but "knew" he could not win. He (like many of our candidates the past 45 years) was on the ballot in all 50 States with more than enough possibility of electoral college votes, just as Trump and Clinton.

    Most important to emphasize is that he has the background of governing and persuasion, and a reputation for extreme honesty. He was successful first as a true self made business man. He is sincerely dedicated to justice and has no scandals or pay to play skeletons in his closet. Also I might mention he had glowing endorsements from a number of major newspapers who took the time to seriously vet him and gave him their endorsement on many issues. Sadly I did not contact you as Gary is one of the best spokespeople for a pro immigration effort one could imagine.

    You are welcome to use this.
    Also may edit as long as intent not changed.

    - Lynn Atherton-Bloxham
  6. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    American voters put our democracy in danger on November 8 by electing a potential dictator as president. I say this despite Trump's conciliatory, respectful and inclusive victory remarks, which had none of the hate and venom that has characterized so much of his campaign, and in which he promised to be a president who would serve Americans of all races and religions and to bring the country together.

    Maybe he will turn out to be a benevolent dictator, or at least a sane one, as in his victory speech.

    But Trump's commitment to the Constitution and to democratic values, as opposed to a totalitarian-style cult of personality, is likely to be tested in many ways over the coming four years, and it may require a great deal of courage and fortitude to speak out in ways which we now take for granted as our right under the Constitution without fear of retaliation.

    What is most disheartening about this election is that so many Americans seem to have been attracted by an authoritarian figure with an overtly racist agenda and that they were so eager to vote away our democracy.

    We can only hope that the decent, respectful, rational side of Donald Trump which we saw in his generous remarks about the same Hillary Clinton whom he had threatened to lock up during the campaign, and his inclusive promise of service to all the American people will last throughout his presidency

    If they do, many of his supporters who put racial animosity and xenophobia ahead of the Constitution in their desire to elect a strongman may be badly disappointed.

    But absent such a volte-face from the dark, dangerous, and divisive Donald Trump we saw during his campaign, Americans may face chellenges in preserving our freedom during the coming years such as this country has never faced before.

    Let us also hope that Trump's election will not put the world on the path toward the tripartate totalitarian structure of Oceania (Trump's America), Eurasia (Putin's Russia) and Eastasia (Communist China or even North Korea), so eerily forshadowed some 70 years ago in George Orwell's 1984.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 11-09-2016 at 08:13 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  7. Julian Ortuondo's Avatar
    WE, the People, spoke, in a loud voice. As I anticipated, the democrat gang was defeated. I was banned from voting by these guys, but not any more. They forgot God, and God forgot them. No more Planned Parenthood killing babies, no more arrogant diplomats... I used to support democrats, not any more. God Bless the USA.
  8. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Response to Editorial comments:
    At the outset, Mr. Trump has only a limited mandate, since he has apparently lost the two-party popular vote. Further, Republicans in Congress, who will be Mr. Trump's foot soldiers in implementing the Trump policy agenda, will likely face a seriously hobbled leadership, as the Freedom Caucus, emboldened by Mr. Trump's victory, will continue to stymie the Speaker du jour (currently, the unfortunate Mr. Ryan).

    He didn't lose the popular vote by much. I'm not sure what you mean by a leadership problem in implementing the Trump policy agenda.

    Some of Mr. Trump's announced priorities (such as can be discerned) will be amenable to unilateral Executive action, such as those on Foreign Policy. Many, however, will require Congressional action, and here Mr. Trump faces the reality of the Filibuster in the Senate. With 48 Democrats, Mr. Schumer will be able to completely throttle critical legislation, despite the forbidding 2018 Senate landscape (which heavily favors Republicans), and will likely find the necessary 40 votes to stop Mr. Trump's agenda at almost every turn. It follows therefore, that Mr. Trump and his Congressional allies will turn to Reconciliation for the core pieces of Mr. Trump's agenda, including immigration and The Wall (since Reconciliation requires only 50 votes in the Senate, i.e. cannot be filibustered under Senate rules).

    I don't see much need for legislation in Trump's plans, other than where funding is needed, and that's difficult to block. Let's look at Trump's 10-point plan so we can be more specific.

    1. We will build a wall along the Southern Border. I don't think the republicans will be willing to fund the wall that Trump has promised, and he would have to wait a long time before he can take enough money from Mexico to fund it. But even if he manages to overcome the funding issue, it will take a long time to build such a wall, and DHS is not known for competently supervising such projects. I can't imagine the project being finished while Trump is still in office....unless he has a second term when he is 74 years old and the novelty of being president has worn off. Bottom line. It sounds impressive in a campaign speech to people who like the idea, but it's not likely to ever happen whether the democrats try to block it or not.

    2. End Catch-And-Release. The republicans probably will fund an increase in detention space, but it's farfetched to expect detention facilities to end catch and release.

    3. Zero tolerance for criminal alien. Isn't this what Obama has been trying to do?

    4. Block funding for sanctuary cities. He would get pushback from his own party on this one. No member is quick to hurt constituents.

    5. Cancel unconstitutional executive orders and enforce all immigration laws. This can be done by signing a one page executive order. And I expect the people who have applied for the program to be subject to arrest and removal unless they are young children. See my article: President Obama’s use of executive discretion could have unintended consequences If Donald Trump becomes our next president, (March 7, 2016),,0307-Rappaport.pdf

    6. We are going to suspend the issuance of visas to any place where adequate screening cannot occur. This can be done with a one page executive order too. See my article: If he is elected to the presidency, Donald Trump will have statutory authority to suspend the entry of all Muslim aliens (April 20, 3016),,0420- Rappaport.pdf

    7. We will ensure that other countries take their people back when we order them deported. The Secretary of State is required to stop issuing visas to countries that refuse to take people back if DOJ brings the situation to their attention, but I don't think it has been used.

    8. We will finally complete the biometric entry-exit visa tracking system. He won't want to do this if he finds out that it would not have any enforcement value. It would identify overstays but not provide their location. And he wouldn't be able to implement it at land POEs in any case.

    9. We will turn off the jobs and benefits magnet. This has been in the works since employer sanctions were enacted in IIRIRA, which was more than 20 years ago. It's never going to happen. The republicans will never fund a large-scale, nationwide employer sanctions enforcement program. Much too expensive.

    10. We will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers. Only congress can do this.

    For more on the ten pint plan, see my article, Is Trump’s Ten-Point Immigration Plan a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing?

    The fate of immigration policy under a Trump presidency therefore, at least for the first year or two, will rest largely on one Reconciliation bill - which will necessarily be massive - perhaps over 3,000 pages in length. The Reconciliation measure will likely include, at a minimum, The Wall, Obamacare repeal and Infrastructure, and will likely be introduced in the House by February 2017. Under Senate rules (and House rules) immigration amendments will be germane to such a Reconciliation measure, and we can count on such amendments being offered both on the House floor and the Senate floor. Pretty much the entire CIR package, minus legalization and possibly mandatory E-Verify, is likely to carry majority support on the floors of both Chambers as an amendment to the Reconciliation bill. In other words, by early 2017, Congress is quite likely to vote on massive changes to the current immigration system. We encourage all immigration advocates to get to work polishing up immigration language for consideration by Congress. It is of course ironic that Mr. Trump's supporters should have paved the way for almost the entire CIR package, but political history has witnessed many such ironies.

    The Wall may or may not happen, but significant changes to the INA appear to be on the cards.

    What statutory changes do you think Trump needs to carry out his plans? I think he will be fine if he gets funding for things he can't do with executive authority....which I don't expect to happen. But the republicans will nevertheless continue to try to eliminate illegal immigration with more laws that they won't fund. They seem to believe that the mere passage of a bill fixes problems.

    Nolan Rappaport

    Updated 11-12-2016 at 02:31 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  9. ImmigrationDaily's Avatar
    I find it very interesting that you propose what Mr. Trump will do and then oppose it. You also appear to ignore that Mr. Trump got approximately 30% of the hispanic vote. Trump has stated several times that he wants to let people into the USA but only the proper way. It would be more productive for Immigration Daily to work to secure a comprehensive and fair immigration plan than to oppose any plan. America and it's citizens work hard to have the country we have. America should be able to establish the guidelines for people who want to come into this country and live. Other countries do that and so should we. If a person does not like their country, let them work to change it for the better. If they did the world would be a better place.

    -Jim Debard
  10. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationDaily
    I find it very interesting that you propose what Mr. Trump will do and then oppose it. You also appear to ignore that Mr. Trump got approximately 30% of the hispanic vote. Trump has stated several times that he wants to let people into the USA but only the proper way. It would be more productive for Immigration Daily to work to secure a comprehensive and fair immigration plan than to oppose any plan. America and it's citizens work hard to have the country we have. America should be able to establish the guidelines for people who want to come into this country and live. Other countries do that and so should we. If a person does not like their country, let them work to change it for the better. If they did the world would be a better place.

    -Jim Debard
    Believe it or not, I try not to take sides. My goal is objectivity. And my perceptions change from time to time.

    I don't think Trump's success with the Hispanic voters or any other group indicates a change in their attitudes towards the republican party. When Trump was pressured by republican leadership to change his ways, he walked away saying he didn't need them. And he was right. He created his own party.

    I agree that, "America should be able to establish the guidelines for people who want to come into this country and live." But its not possible. The border is not secure, and the number of undocumented aliens has gotten so large that deporting them is no longer possible. Every undocumented alien has a statutory right to a hearing before an immigration judge, and the immigration court is hopelessly backlogged with the current population of people in removal proceedings. What do you think would happen if we added 10 to 20 million aliens to their caseload. And every alien who is ordered deported by an immigration judge has a regulatory right to a review by the Board of Immigration Appeals and can't be deported while an appeal is pending. And those are just a few of the problems.

    The reality is that Trump at some point is going to realize that he has to reduce the undocumented population with a legalization program. At that point, the dems will have another opportunity to cut a deal with the republicans. But they weren't willing do compromise enough BT (Before Trump), and probably won't be willing to do it now either.

    Nolan Rappaport
  11. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    In the less than one week since Trump lost the popular vote in the election to Hillary Clinton by some 2 million votes, he has, to the relief of many who are concerned about the future of American democracy, backtracked on some of his more extreme campaign proposals, such as mass deportation of non-criminal immigrants, and prosecuting or locking up Hillary Clinton.

    Trump has also, in a TV interview, directly warned his supporters not to attack or harass protesters againt him and he has publicly upheld their right to protest peacefully.

    This is all to the good. However, his announced intention to incarcerate and/or deport up to 3 million "criminal" immigrants immediately raises serious questions about whether he will respect their constitutional and human rights, and whether he will move on from locking up millions of "criminals" to millions more non-criminal immigrants, and ultiimately, millions of American citizens who might oppose or disagree with him about various policy issues.

    Are we going to see a "kinder, gentler", more open Donald Trump after the inauguration than we saw during the campaign, or are these announced beginning steps toward mass deportation, and the hostility that some of his aides have shown toward the nationwide demonstrations agaisnt him, the beginnings of fascism in America?

    We will have to wait and see.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 11-14-2016 at 06:14 AM 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: