America Has a Right to Decide Who Comes In

Please follow us on X and Telegram

Apparently, enforcing immigration law is controversial. First, let’s correct a popular misconception: the McCarran–Walter Act of 1952 did NOT ban Muslims from immigrating to America. It imposed no blanket religious ban on Muslims. However totalitarian movements are banned from immigration as well, including Communism. It was a comprehensive immigration law addressing admission, naturalization, national security, and deportation.
 
It authorized the federal government to deny visas and block entry to any foreign national who was a member of, or affiliated with, the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party. This applied to immigrants and temporary visitors alike (including foreign scholars and artists). There is however a lot of cooperation and coordination happening now between Islam and Communist movements, the so called Red/Green alliance in the United States currently. Islam can certainly be viewed as a totalitarian movement, although it is not specifically named in the act. 

Passed over President Harry Truman’s veto, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 maintained restrictive national-origin quotas. It established preferences for skilled workers and family reunification, while imposing ideological and security restrictions during the Cold War.

And here’s the important part: the law is STILL IN FORCE, as amended.  The act remains the foundation of federal immigration law under Title 8 of the U.S. Code. It wasn’t repealed and sent to a museum alongside rotary telephones and eight-track tapes.

The principle worth defending is simple: a sovereign nation has the right and responsibility to decide who enters its territory. It requires sensible screening, secure borders, and enforcement of laws enacted by our elected representatives. Apparently, during the Cold War, lawmakers understood that national security mattered. Today, merely suggesting that a country should know who is coming through its front door can trigger accusations of bigotry.

America can welcome lawful immigrants, reunite families, attract skilled workers, and protect refugees who qualify under the law while maintaining secure borders. Working towards US citizenship, while allowing a manageable modest amount of immigrants is reasonable.  These goals are not mutually exclusive. A homeowner can be generous without handing out house keys to every stranger who walks past.

The bottom line: Immigration enforcement is not inherently hateful, national sovereignty is not bigotry, and a country needn’t abolish its locks to prove it likes its neighbors. America can treat people fairly while retaining the common sense to decide who gets through the front door.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!