Trump points to Canada as a model for U.S. immigration reform in Congress speech
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/08/30/us/syrian-refugees-in-the-united-states.html?_r=0
You lose.
Of course, Trump's gonna try and send them all back.
It looks like one step forward and one step back. The problem is any country, yes
any country has the right to protect its borders. There are cases for humanitarian
assistance and even acceptance of refugees. Those applying for immigration are
vetted for up to two years before coming into the country. In America the seven
country ban was the problem because the new government doesn't posses the art
of civility it is brash, broad brush and forgets the articles of what a democracy is..
eg, A democracy goes with the will of the majority TRUE. However in a democracy
the will of the minority must be respected. That is not happening.
There are a lot of things that make up a policy regardless of what government is dealing
with.
1 what does the law say
2 are the laws being enforced
3 past practice although not part of the written law it becomes part of present practice.
eg pot laws and public shows of disobedience Law enforcement is present but no arrests
4 sometimes the law of the land and the constitution of the country conflict with each other
because through practice over time the law has not been constitutionally challenged.
when it does get challenged we find the present law is indeed a violation of the constitution.
The constitution of a country is the soul of the nation written in the ink of histories struggle
This is what happened south of the border, all these things converged to create a situation
where the law and the constitution conflict because the relevance of the law became blurred
over time,
The problem is not that there is a problem, the problem is no one seems to have a reasonable
solution to the problem at hand, combine that with the polarized political landscape there is no
focused will to solve this or any other problem brought before the powers that be in Washington
any country has the right to protect its borders. There are cases for humanitarian
assistance and even acceptance of refugees. Those applying for immigration are
vetted for up to two years before coming into the country. In America the seven
country ban was the problem because the new government doesn't posses the art
of civility it is brash, broad brush and forgets the articles of what a democracy is..
eg, A democracy goes with the will of the majority TRUE. However in a democracy
the will of the minority must be respected. That is not happening.
There are a lot of things that make up a policy regardless of what government is dealing
with.
1 what does the law say
2 are the laws being enforced
3 past practice although not part of the written law it becomes part of present practice.
eg pot laws and public shows of disobedience Law enforcement is present but no arrests
4 sometimes the law of the land and the constitution of the country conflict with each other
because through practice over time the law has not been constitutionally challenged.
when it does get challenged we find the present law is indeed a violation of the constitution.
The constitution of a country is the soul of the nation written in the ink of histories struggle
This is what happened south of the border, all these things converged to create a situation
where the law and the constitution conflict because the relevance of the law became blurred
over time,
The problem is not that there is a problem, the problem is no one seems to have a reasonable
solution to the problem at hand, combine that with the polarized political landscape there is no
focused will to solve this or any other problem brought before the powers that be in Washington