The day ISIS struck my home town.......

[inv136]

Seems it's more complicated than what I said. I was referring to the 1952 case but we do have a clause concerning Immigration and Naturalizing laws.

To make it clear, I'd say instead that we have the power to deport and ban the Muslims from our country. Trump is working on that.

I was an Immigration Special Agent for 28 years and I don't have a clue about what you are referring to? The US Constitution doesn't ban Muslims or any other religious groups. All it does say is that the government will not establish a religion (kind of like the Spanish government where the Catholic Church was part of the government). It does support freedom of religion and not freedom from religion which the "separation of church and state" people mistakenly believe. You can't (and there is no authority under the Immigration & Nationality Act) ban and deport legally admitted aliens who are Muslim unless they violate their status. There are sections of the I&NA that make aliens (from any country regardless of religion) inadmissible to enter the U.S. if they had certain diseases or were convicted criminals or members of terrorist organizations. The US State Dept. can also set limits on the admission of aliens from certain areas where terrorist activity is a threat to national security. But, not solely based on religion. That would be unconstitutional. And we cannot deport aliens who are legally admitted and have not violated their status just because of their religion. That would also be unconstitutional. So, I would say that you are wrong.

[Olgo]

Took me a while to find it but there it is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-anti-muslim-stance-echoes-a-us-law-from-the-1700s/2016/08/18/6da7b486-6585-11e6-8b27-bb8ba39497a2_story.html

[sqlbullet]

Unfortunately WaPo wants my email to allow me the privilege of viewing their article,so I had to read the article from source, rather than well formatted HTML.

And I stopped when I realized the justification was the 1790 naturalization act which established rules for determining the race of the applicant, and denied citizenship unless you qualified as "white".

I feel I am safe in saying that there is no way such a law would pass judicial review in the last 50 years.  Probably not in the last 100 years.

Trump can rattle his saber all he wants about banning muslims from entering the country.  The legal hurdles to making that happen are huge.  And if he does succeed, we should all be VERY afraid, because it means we have entered a political climate where no natural rights are honored or respected.

[Olgo]

true that. I don't know why I thought it was the 1951 article.

[inv136]

Unfortunately WaPo wants my email to allow me the privilege of viewing their article,so I had to read the article from source, rather than well formatted HTML.

And I stopped when I realized the justification was the 1790 naturalization act which established rules for determining the race of the applicant, and denied citizenship unless you qualified as "white".

I feel I am safe in saying that there is no way such a law would pass judicial review in the last 50 years.  Probably not in the last 100 years.

Trump can rattle his saber all he wants about banning muslims from entering the country.  The legal hurdles to making that happen are huge.  And if he does succeed, we should all be VERY afraid, because it means we have entered a political climate where no natural rights are honored or respected.

The main law that covers Immigration and Naturalization for the last half century is the Immigration & Nationality Act (1952). The 1790 Act would have been revoked long before the I&NA. There have a been a few additional Acts which have added components that have strengthened the enforcement of the I&NA, but, the I&NA is the definitive basis for all current Immigration and Naturalization law. Trump, through the State Dept. can set limitations and cut off entry of citizens of countries where terrorist activity is based from or from hostile countries.

He can also set up a registry (not for US citizens or even immigrant aliens that are Permanent Residents) for aliens that are from these hostile countries or terrorist regions that are admitted as nonimmigrants or are here illegally and want to apply for adjustment of status to legal status (such as an illegal alien married to a US citizen). The registry cannot be based on religion. A lot of people are whining about Trump registering US citizens of alien descent and immigrants based solely on the Muslim religion. This is all false and would be unconstitutional. US citizens and immigrant aliens would not be on any registries.   

https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/act.html   

[JSutter]

Once again, Europe is experiencing chaos via islamic violence.  Hungary is fighting to keep their culture & identity;  they remember their own Sept 11, at the Gates of Vienna.  Look it up for details.

Some folks share personal testimony of being victims of jihadist violence and can be found via the Iinternet and in our neighborhoods.
Two reference sites with local news, pics, video, etc are

Thereligionofpeace.com

Jihadwatch.org

The information is out there, including photos video and first hand testimony.

[JSutter]

For a list of some of the jihadist violence in the last thirty days, review this and if you have concerns or questions there are plenty of sources. 


https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=Last30