In a recent report in The Hill, correspondent Lydia Wheeler has the headline, “Court appears skeptical of allowing Trump to end DACA,” and one of her excerpts reads as follows:

“At least two of the three judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals seemed to agree – the acting secretary of Homeland Security’s September decision to rescind the program violates the immigrants’ rights to equal protection of the laws.” -END-

Firstly, when they say that the program “violates the immigrants’ rights to equal protection of the laws,” it’s an assertion that requires the indulgence of functional illiteracy since there’s a clear disparity between “immigrant” and “illegal immigrant” – the latter to which DACA folks technically belong.

When politicians and activist judges conflate the terms “illegal immigrant” and “immigrant,” they’re purposely ensuring that folks expressing concern about the former can be easily characterized as bigoted against the latter.  That’s the rhetorical strategy of a cowardly intellect.

And I say this as someone who supports rapid pathways to citizenship – providing they’re inextricably tied to sealing up the border.

Why?

When it comes to our nation’s states, the Constitution’s Article 4 (Section 4) says our government “shall protect each of them against invasion.”  And yes, the yearly 400,000 violating the entry laws into our homeland constitutes an invasion.

 

Share us on: