logo
‘Anti-Americanism' screening for immigrants seeking work and citizenship, critics call it ‘really worrisome'

‘Anti-Americanism' screening for immigrants seeking work and citizenship, critics call it ‘really worrisome'

Minta day ago
Immigrants seeking a legal pathway to live and work in the United States will now be subject to screening for 'anti-Americanism',' authorities said Tuesday, raising concerns among critics that it gives officers too much leeway in rejecting foreigners based on a subjective judgment.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said officers will now consider whether an applicant for benefits, such as a green card, 'endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused" anti-American, terrorist or antisemitic views.
'America's benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies,' Matthew Tragesser, USCIS spokesman, said in a statement. 'Immigration benefits—including to live and work in the United States—remain a privilege, not a right.'
It isn't specified what constitutes anti-Americanism and it isn't clear how and when the directive would be applied.
'The message is that the U.S. and immigration agencies are going to be less tolerant of anti-Americanism or antisemitism when making immigration decisions," Elizabeth Jacobs, director of regulatory affairs and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates for immigration restrictions, said on Tuesday.
Jacobs said the government is being more explicit in the kind of behaviors and practices officers should consider, but emphasized that discretion is still in place. "The agency cannot tell officers that they have to deny — just to consider it as a negative discretion,' she said.
Critics worry the policy update will allow for more subjective views of what is considered anti-American and allow an officer's personal bias to cloud his or her judgment.
'For me, the really big story is they are opening the door for stereotypes and prejudice and implicit bias to take the wheel in these decisions. That's really worrisome," said Jane Lilly Lopez, associate professor of sociology at Brigham Young University.
The policy changes follow others recently implemented since the start of the Trump administration including social media vetting and the most recent addition of assessing applicants seeking naturalization for 'good moral character'. That will not only consider 'not simply the absence of misconduct' but also factor the applicant's positive attributes and contributions.
'It means you are going to just do a whole lot more work to provide evidence that you meet our standards,' Lopez said.
Experts disagree on the constitutionality of the policy involving people who are not U.S. citizens and their freedom of speech. Jacobs, of the Center for Immigration Studies, said First Amendment rights do not extend to people outside the U.S. or who are not U.S. citizens.
Ruby Robinson, senior managing attorney with the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, believes the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution protects all people in the United States, regardless of their immigration status, against government encroachment. 'A lot of this administration's activities infringe on constitutional rights and do need to be resolved, ultimately, in courts,' Robinson added.
Attorneys are advising clients to adjust their expectations.
'People need to understand that we have a different system today and a lot more things that apply to U.S. citizens are not going to apply to somebody who's trying to enter the United States," said Jaime Diez, an immigration attorney based in Brownsville, Texas.
Jonathan Grode, managing partner of Green and Spiegel immigration law firm, said the policy update was not unexpected considering how the Trump administration approaches immigration.
'This is what was elected. They're allowed to interpret the rules the way they want,' Grode said. 'The policy always to them is to shrink the strike zone. The law is still the same.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why the thriving Indian diaspora in the US is not an asset anymore
Why the thriving Indian diaspora in the US is not an asset anymore

The Print

time19 minutes ago

  • The Print

Why the thriving Indian diaspora in the US is not an asset anymore

China is a manufacturing colossus and has a monopoly on rare earths; Russia has thousands of ICBMs; India has very few chips to play poker with. No wonder academics like Ashley Tellis and politicians like Peter Navarro are quite openly telling us that we should accept vassal status. In any case, we speak good English, even in our present condition. We need to do more than that. We should become like Europeans and reconcile ourselves to abject servility in front of 'Daddy'. That a former Prime Minister from the Netherlands, the country of Rembrandt and Spinoza, who is now the NATO chief, feels comfortable being a comic courtier in the American throne room tells you something about the decline of the Dutch and the utter helplessness of Europe. Now, just consider some other world leaders. We have to assume that Xi Jinping does not know much English. He invariably speaks in Mandarin. Vladimir Putin probably has some working knowledge of English. But he always speaks in Russian. We know that Narendra Modi is pretty fluent in English. But he chooses not to speak in English. This may constitute proof that, among others, here are three countries that choose not to accept the mantle of being vassals. And therein may be the problem. The White House meeting with European leaders involved a brief press appearance by all of them. It was interesting to watch that all the European leaders spoke in English, and pretty reasonable English at that. Being an old man, I am in a position to reflect on the past. I just cannot imagine a Charles De Gaulle or even a Konrad Adenauer opting to speak in English before the international press. I remember that De Gaulle went to Montreal and stood up for a Free Quebec, but he did that in French. In some of my favourite podcasts—The Duran, Glenn Diesen—it has now become almost casually acceptable to refer to European countries as American vassal states. Europe got this way by skimping on defence expenditure, by becoming a continent of museums, cafes, parks and concert halls, by encouraging citizens to work fewer hours, by encouraging generous early retirements and above all by committing itself to a cosmopolitanism that quite simply denies that citizens and residents have duties. Fortunately, at least as of now, China, Russia and India have not succumbed to these fashions. Also read: Trump govt considering ban on Muslim Brotherhood—Is the West's romance with Islamism over? Lessons for Indian diaspora Our media tends to over-personalise matters by focusing excessively on Trump. The issues are bigger and of a long-term nature. The Americans supported and encouraged China's economic rise, hoping that over time China would become wound up in American soft power. That did not happen. They are therefore not going to make, what in their minds would be a second mistake: Support emphatically, the rise of an India, especially one which refuses to accept a servile status. A credentialed academic like Tellis argues that it is in India's interests to accept the American embrace unconditionally. India is unlikely to get the break which China got with a soft entry into the WTO. Navarro goes one step further. He suggests that India drop diversification and indigenisation of its weapons systems and stick to expensive American weapons with no technology transfer and consequent complete reliance on the whims of American suppliers who can at any time delay spares with arguments about supply chain problems. We have noticed these in recent times with jet engines. The thriving Indian diaspora in the US has been an asset till now. Things may change. The excessive publicity about Indian success stories and their high income and wealth levels has begun to breed envy and resentment in non-elite sections of the American populace. There might be a campaign against H1B visas and even a gradual expulsion of persons stuck in a limbo with pending green cards and pending citizenship. It is important to remember that, unlike in our country, where social change is slow, even glacial, such changes take place in America with lightning speed. Besides, one small change in the law can have very significant impacts. Lyndon Johnson's one change in US immigration policies in 1965 led to the creation of the present Indian American efflorescence. A similar small change in any regulation can have deleterious effects this time around. What choices do we have? We are a poor country, looking forward to a better future. We cannot imitate Russia or China. We need to navigate carefully in choppy waters. I believe that we are largely in agreement that we cannot opt for the European model of subservience and vassalage. In these circumstances, we need to take a fresh look at our PR strategy on handling multiple constituencies within the United States. If we focus exclusively on the political and bureaucratic class, we risk making the mistake that Israel has made in recent times and losing the wider PR battle. The first thing we need to do is to stop crowing about successful Indian CEOs. We must strive to stay under the radar and project a benign image at local levels and stay steady, but non-confrontational in Washington. All of this is going to be very tricky and difficult. But let us have no doubts. The ground beneath our feet is shifting. And for the time being, the best strategy might be to stop crowing about us becoming a large economy (we are nowhere there in per capita terms anyway) or becoming a big power. We can lie low till our time comes. We can learn from our northern neighbour. Jaithirth 'Jerry' Rao is a retired entrepreneur who lives in Lonavala. He has published three books: 'Notes from an Indian Conservative', 'The Indian Conservative', and 'Economist Gandhi'. Views are personal. (Edited by Theres Sudeep)

'Europe takes lion's share': JD Vance says US won't carry 'burden' of Ukraine's security; Washington to step 'if necessary'
'Europe takes lion's share': JD Vance says US won't carry 'burden' of Ukraine's security; Washington to step 'if necessary'

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

'Europe takes lion's share': JD Vance says US won't carry 'burden' of Ukraine's security; Washington to step 'if necessary'

JD Vance (AP file photo) US vice president J D Vance has said that Europe would take the "lion's share of the burden" in ensuring Ukraine's security, while Washington would "only help if necessary." Speaking to Fox News, Vance said the primary responsibility lay with Europe because of its proximity to Ukraine and the resultant security interests. "No matter what happens, no matter what form this takes, the Europeans are going to have to take the lion's share of the burden. It's their continent, it's their security, and the president has been very clear—they're going to have to step up," Vance said. "I don't think we should carry the burden here. I think we should be helpful if it's necessary to end the war and to stop the killing," he added. However, Vance said that the US remained open to offering support if needed, while trying to minimise its involvement. "What he (Trump) said very clearly is, 'The United States is open to having a conversation, but we're not going to make commitments until we figure out what is going to be necessary to stop the war in the first place,'" Vance said. US president Donald Trump, meanwhile, on Tuesday ruled out sending American troops to Ukraine. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, "The president has definitively stated US boots will not be on the ground in Ukraine, but we can certainly help in coordination and perhaps provide other means of security guarantees to our European allies." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Many Malaysians don't know about this! iOS Credit Read More Undo She added, however, that the US may provide air security. "It is an option and a possibility. I certainly won't rule out anything as far as military options that the president has at his disposal. I'll let him do that. I can tell you he's ruled out boots on the ground," Leavitt said. Trump had earlier said in July that his administration reached a new deal with Nato, requiring the alliance to cover the full cost of US weapons supplied to Ukraine, The Hill reported. Trump is pushing to get Putin and Zelenskyy to the table more than three years after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but Kyiv insists on Western-backed security guarantees to stop Moscow from striking again. 'We need strong security guarantees to ensure a truly secure and lasting peace,' Zelenskyy wrote on Telegram on Wednesday, hours after Russian missile and drone attacks hit six regions across Ukraine. European allies are exploring the creation of a force to underpin any future peace deal. A coalition of 30 nations—including key European partners, Japan and Australia—has reportedly already pledged support for the plan.

With 10% commission on Ukraine weapon sales, Trump is real profiteer of Russia's war — not India
With 10% commission on Ukraine weapon sales, Trump is real profiteer of Russia's war — not India

First Post

timean hour ago

  • First Post

With 10% commission on Ukraine weapon sales, Trump is real profiteer of Russia's war — not India

With 10% commission on the sale of weapons to Ukraine, it is Donald Trump —not India— that is profiting from the Russian war on Ukraine. US President Donald Trump waves as he boards Air Force One as he departs Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on August 15, 2025, en route to Anchorage. Image- AFP US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has accused India of profiting from the Russian war on Ukraine, but US President Donald Trump is the real profiteer. Trump is selling weapons to Ukraine via European countries at a 10 per cent premium — using the war to fulfil American coffers that are getting depleted as a result of his tax cuts and ballooning government expenditure. Moreover, Trump has essentially made the US military a private militia as he has put a cost to US involvement in providing security guarantees to Ukraine. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'We are selling arms to Europeans, who are then selling them on to the Ukrainians, and President Trump is taking 10 per cent mark-up on the arms. So maybe that 10 per cent will cover the cost of the air cover,' Bessent told Fox News. Ironically, Bessent —who has inadvertently exposed Trump's profiteering— is the same official who accused India. 'They [India] are just profiteering. They are reselling. This is what I would call the Indian arbitrage — buying cheap Russian oil, reselling it as product,' Bessent previously told CNBC, adding that India has made $16 billion in 'excess profits'. As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has reportedly offered to buy up to $100 billions of weapons from the United States, Trump is set to get a $10 billion cut — in addition to any taxes that the sellers would way to the US government anyway. Trump has said that he will not put American troops on the ground in Ukraine as part of any peacekeeping force. But he has said that he will be open to deploying American warplanes to police Ukrainian skies. He has suggested that those planes would operate from Ukraine's neighbouring countries. Notably, Ukraine's neighbour Poland is a Nato member and has regularly hosted fighter planes of allies like the United States and the United Kingdom. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'When it comes to security, they [European nations] are willing to put people on the ground. We're willing to help them with things, especially, probably, if you talk about by air because nobody has stuff we have,' Trump told Fox on Tuesday. Trump has also suggested that he could join European nations in providing Ukraine with Article 5-type security guarantees to Ukraine in case of a peace deal outside of Nato's frameworks. The Article 5 is one of the core elements of Nato that defines the collective defence principle, which terms an attack on ally on all allies and allows for a united response.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store