Trump reportedly eyeing EO that would allow local governments to refuse refugees

A new report suggests the Trump administration could be working on a new plan that would give more power to the states in the case of accepting refugees.

Under existing law, approved refugees settle into jurisdictions chosen by the federal government. According to a new report from NBC News, the Trump administration may be finalizing a plan to allow states to have the power to accept or deny federally approved refugees.

(Screenshot from YouTube)

NBC News has reportedly reviewed a draft copy of the executive order which says that “the federal government will resettle refugees only where both the relevant state and local governments have consented to participate.”

An anonymous official with the Department of Homeland Security apparently said this draft is currently being reviewed by lawyers before being finalized.

An exception to this new rule would be if the approved refugee has family in a certain state. Otherwise, states would have the right to accept or deny refugees. If they deny refugees, it would then be up to the federal government to find a location willing to take them in. Under current law, a state can protest the placement of refugees, but they have no real power in the situation.

This rule would actually make a lot of sense and keep in line with the president’s longheld belief that states need more power in the face of a growing federal government.

This new rule would also benefit both states and refugees. If the United States is accepting refugees, it only makes sense that they should go to a state that can properly provide them with the resources they need. If a state cannot or if the state sees a problem, it’s only fair that they should be able to alert the federal government to this. It will create a more streamlined system.

Leftists are predictably up in arms about it already because the Trump administration can do nothing to please them on immigration at this point.


Source: Fox News

 

Peter Boogaard, who worked on immigration issues in the Obama White House, told NBC News that the potential executive order would somehow hinder religious organizations. He also said the order “would also have a dramatic impact on the ability of future administrations to return refugee admissions to the normal historic levels.”

“Governors could elect not to take part in the refugee resettlement program. That would have a horrible impact on the program. That would literally be an abdication of federal authority,” Mark Hetfield, president and CEO of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), which works to help refugees, told NBC News.

In other words, states would have zero rights when it comes to accepting refugees.

This would be a common sense executive order and it would keep in line with other moves by the administration on immigration, like a crackdown at the southern border and the recent announcement that the federal government would finally define the term “public charge” when accepting legal immigrants. A “public charge” is now considered to be someone who would live off of one or more government programs. Being a public charge will now be a negative factor when someone applies for citizenship.

Again, this only makes sense and is based in simple logic, but liberals seem to pine for the pre-Trump world where elected officials did absolutely zero to reign in America’s out of control immigration system.

Zachary Leeman

Staff Writer
[email protected]

Zachary Leeman is originally from Maine, he served in the United States Army Reserve for six years. He currently lives in Nashville, Tennessee.
Zachary Leeman

Comments

Latest Articles