Trump

President Trump says it is “common sense” to reduce overall immigration to the United States while more than 30 million Americans are jobless and want full-time work.

During an interview with Fox News’ John Roberts on Saturday evening, Trump said reducing immigration by halting foreign visa programs is a “common sense” approach to the nation’s mass unemployment problem caused by the Chinese coronavirus crisis.

“I think it’s going to make a lot of people very happy,” Trump said of his plan to expand his current executive order that halted new employment-based green cards from being issued to foreign workers.

“It’s common sense, to be honest with you, it’s common sense,” Trump said.

The plan has overwhelming support from overall Americans and, specifically, from swing-state voters.

In April, nearly 80 percent of Americans said they wanted immigration halted to the U.S. during the crisis and amid mass unemployment. This month, majorities between 55 to 85 percent of voters in ten swing states said they want less immigration at the moment.

Trump said there will be “very little” exemptions in the expansion of the order, and hinted that he may take further action in the future to cut more immigration.

“Very little exclusion and they’re pretty tight,” Trump said. “And we may even go very tight for a period of time.”

As Breitbart News reported, Trump is expected to sign the expansion of the order within the next week. The expansion will halt new foreign workers arriving in the U.S. to take jobs on H-1B visas, H-2B visas, J-1 visas, and L-1 visas.

Extensive research by economists such as George Borjas and analyst Steven Camarota revealed that the country’s current mass legal immigration system burdens U.S. taxpayers and America’s working and middle class, while redistributing about $500 billion in wealth every year to major employers and newly arrived immigrants. Similarly, research has revealed how Americans’ wages are crushed by the country’s high immigration levels.

A federal appeals court on Wednesday handed a major win to the Trump administration in its fight against “sanctuary” jurisdictions, ruling that it can deny grant money to states that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York overturned a lower court ruling that stopped the administration’s 2017 move to withhold grant money from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, which dispenses over $250 million a year to state and local criminal justice efforts.

“Today’s decision rightfully recognizes the lawful authority of the Attorney General to ensure that Department of Justice grant recipients are not at the same time thwarting federal law enforcement priorities,” a DOJ spokesman said in a statement. “The grant conditions here require states and cities that receive DOJ grants to share information about criminals in custody.  The federal government uses this information to enforce national immigration laws--policies supported by successive Democrat and Republican administrations.”

“All Americans will benefit from increased public safety as this Administration is able to implement its lawful immigration and public safety policies,” the statement said.

The latest decision conflicts with rulings from other appeals courts across the country concerning sanctuary policies, indicating a Supreme Court review is ultimately likely.

New York City and liberal states including New York, Washington, Massachusetts and Connecticut sued the government, and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York backed them — ordering the money be released and stopping the government from putting immigration-related conditions on grants.

But the appeals court ruled that it “cannot agree that the federal government must be enjoined from imposing the challenged conditions on the federal grants here at issue.”

“These conditions help the federal government enforce national immigration laws and policies supported by successive Democratic and Republican administrations,” the court ruled. “But more to the authorization point, they ensure that applicants satisfy particular statutory grant requirements imposed by Congress and subject to Attorney General oversight.”

It also disagreed with the district court’s claim that the conditions intrude on powers reserved only to states, noting that in immigration policy the Supreme Court has found that the federal government maintains “broad” and “preeminent” power.

The ruling marks a key win for the administration in its efforts to crack down on the continued use of “sanctuary” policies that limit local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities in order to shield illegal immigrants from deportation.

"Amnesty" may have been his undoing.

The 2013 "Gang of Eight" immigration deal arguably killed Marco Rubio's presidential run.

"Build the wall," is Donald Trump's sole consistent policy — besides his proposed moratorium on Muslim immigration.

How did immigration become the dominant issue in the Republican primary?

It's a question that's baffled Republican elites and Beltway conservatives who were caught off guard by the issue's salience. While Washington politicians debated child tax-credits, Obamacare replacements and ethanol mandates, Trump went out and called for a wall to keep out the rapists that Mexico was supposedly sending north.

If immigration sank Rubio, it wasn't because voters agreed with Trump's policies — exit polls actually show most Republican primary voters favoring Rubio's approach to illegal immigrants, which includes a path to legalization.

Instead, the issue was seen in a much rougher sketch by voters: Rubio tried to cut a deal for amnesty; Trump wants to keep out the illegals.

Immigration matters so much first, because it touches on all important policy areas.