Tag: immigration

USA’s Somali refugee programme is a costly hoax

Somali ‘refugees’ across America recently celebrated Somalia’s ‘independence,’ leading some to wonder why they don’t simply go back to their own country that they claim to love so much.

But not only aren’t the Somalis who came to America as refugees while fleeing a fake ‘genocide’ and using fake family reunification claims in the 90s not leaving (though they frequently make return trips back home to buy property and run for office in their own home country) but more Somalis continue arriving and claiming refugee status from the country they love so much.

In 2024, Somalis were responsible for nearly 5% of refugee claims and while the Trump administration has cracked down on the refugee fraud machine, Europe has seen a flood of Somali ‘refugees’ with 38,000 Somali refugee applications filed between 2023 and 2025.

This is at odds with the regular expressions of pride in Somalia from elected officials like Rep. Ilhan Omar who hail their country as one of the greatest in the world, and also demand that the United States, which they regularly belittle and insult, continue admitting Somali refugees.

When the Trump administration began to unwind the TPS (Temporary Protected Status) that kept Somali illegals from being deported, Somalis and their political allies launched a furious campaign to explain why a status usually used for a country that has experienced a major disaster should still apply to Somalia 35 years after the original civil war that triggered it.

The 2,471 Somalis being protected from deportation by TPS and the 1,383 Somalis with pending TPS applications.could not be sent back to Somalia, we’re told, because it’s so awful.

The Minnesota State House delegation for Minneapolis, which has done more to celebrate the glory of Somalia’s independence than any other place in America, issued a revealing condemnation of the end of TPS. “TPS for Somalia was first designated in 1991 due to ongoing civil conflict and extraordinary conditions and has been continuously extended for more than three decades.”

The statement by, among others, Somali politicians Rep. Mohamud Noor and Rep. Anquam Mahamoud, did not actually directly state that Somalia was a disaster area, but only indirectly referenced that “conditions in designated countries meet clear statutory standards related to conflict and instability.” Is Somalia “unstable” and in a state of “conflict”? They don’t say.

Attorney General Keith X. Ellison and 15 other state attorney generals filed an amicus in the Somali lawsuit against terminating their 35-year-old ‘Temporary Protected Status’ because “civil war has raged in Somalia for the ensuing thirty five years, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths, child soldiers, extrajudicial killings, sexual and gender-based violence.”

While Somalia’s government has been fighting Al-Shabab, its own local Jihadist movement, the Somalia colonist population in America is a major source of funds for the Al Qaeda linked group, and there have been relatively few civilian casualties from the fighting with civilian deaths accounting for only 2% of the casualties in 2025 (and Islamic terrorist groups often misrepresent Jihadists as civilians, so the numbers are likely lower still) and on par with some of the deaths due to Islamic terrorism suffered by western countries and Israel in particularly bad years.

100 civilians dying in terrorist battles among a population of 20 million is not a basis for a national state of emergency or a finding that no Somali Muslim can live safely in Somalia.

Keep reading

LA City Council tried to hide details of noncitizen voting — and failed

Ten days ago, the LA City Council voted to start moving noncitizen voting toward the ballot.

This week, the council ran away from it unanimously.

What happened in between? The proposal had to be written down.

Supporters said critics were overreacting. This was just the beginning of a conversation, they argued. The details would come later.

Well, the details came later.

And the details killed it.

Last week, city staff returned with the actual language needed to move the measure forward. That is when the wheels came off the car.

On Tuesday afternoon, the City Council unanimously voted to pull the proposal from the 2026 ballot and send it back for further study.

This is how bad policy gets laundered through City Hall. Politicians vote for a vague concept wrapped in moral language. They tell voters not to worry because the details will be worked out later. Then, once the authority has been granted, the real policy is written by the same politicians and activists who avoided spelling it out before the election.

That was the plan.

It just did not survive contact with paper.

The original council vote did not create noncitizen voting in LA, and it did not put noncitizen voting itself before voters. It started a process requiring city staff to come back with ballot language and a clearer explanation of what voters would be asked to approve.

Keep reading

Insidious truth behind LA City Council’s push for noncitizen voting

Well, that was quick.

The LA City Council yanked its own ballot initiative proposal that, if passed in November, would have allowed noncitizens to vote in local elections.

There was nothing in the city’s proposal that would have prevented illegal immigrants from voting.

People with no right to be in the country would be making major decisions about the management and the future of one of America’s great cities.

What would prevent some future, federal administration from throwing the country’s borders open to tip the balance of power in LA toward one party or another — or, perhaps, toward socialism?

Nothing.

No one stopped to ask whether giving noncitizens the right to vote locally would even be constitutional. It is, at least, a complicated question.

Also, no one seemed to have given any thought to how the city would run such an election, and how noncitizens could appear on voter rolls for local elections while also being sequestered from state and federal elections.

It is telling that the initial vote to put noncitizen voting on the ballot was 10-5. It was framed as a way to give hard-working immigrants a voice. The subsequent vote to pull the ballot measure was 14-0.

Keep reading

“Is There No England Now?”

Whether Keir Starmer has resigned or not, Britain’s turmoil over immigration, speech, and identity signals a ruling consensus fracturing under public backlash.

If news reports are accurate, by the time you read this, Keir Starmer may no longer be the prime minister of the United Kingdom. Depending on the source, he has either decided to resign or is seriously considering it. In any case, the events in Britain over the last few weeks—the murder, enabled by the police, of Henry Nowak by the Sikh Vickrum Digwa; the attempted beheading of a man in Belfast by a Muslim immigrant; the release of a report on the systematic and protracted rape of young women and girls by Muslim “grooming gangs”; the subsequent (and understandable) renewal of unrest over largely unchecked immigration; and the government’s increased efforts to limit and control speech—have likely doomed Starmer and the Labour Party, making it impossible for them to maintain or regain the trust of the people.

None of this should really surprise anyone. In a narrow context, Starmer has been on this course for some time, likely since the very start of his premiership. He was never especially well-liked and always seemed to be the wrong man for the moment. In a broader context, Starmer’s agenda, which pits the ruling class against the rest of the country, has agitated the rest of the country for years. The catch, of course, is that “Starmer’s agenda” isn’t really his at all. It’s the agenda of the ruling class more generally. Again, in a narrow context, immigration, plus speech suppression, plus net-zero green madness, has been the agenda of both British major political parties for the entirety of the 21st century. In a broader context, the often unintentional but always unremitting annihilation of the uniquely British identity has been the agenda of the British ruling class since the end of World War II.

Keep reading

90,000 Haitians live in Massachusetts and only 10,000 are working…

Even though the Supreme Court has put out some disastrous duds, they’ve also handed President Trump major victories as well. They cleared the way for his team to end Temporary Protected Status for tens of thousands of Haitian migrants. What does TPS mean, exactly? Well, in short, when a foreigner is on TPS, they don’t have to work, and there’s no risk of being deported.

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) does not require you to work. Instead, it gives eligible individuals the legal permission to work in the U.S. and protects them from deportation. TPS does not require you to hold a job; it simply provides the legal right to work if you choose to.

So, if they’re not holding down a job, they’re collecting welfare and mooching off the American taxpayer.

The good news is that President Trump can now begin deporting them.

Of course, the reaction from the left came in fast and furious style. The same crowd that exploded with outrage when President Trump called Haiti a “shithole” country years ago, flooding social media with beautiful beach photos and travel brochures, is now arguing that sending migrants back would be a death sentence because Haiti is simply too dangerous.

Western Lensmen:

Jan 2018. Democrats and the media were apoplectic over Trump’s “shithole” comments, and were engaged in a campaign to defend Haiti.

Here, Anderson Cooper explains to Conan what an “amazing,” “incredible” and “culturally rich” place it is, and how he loves to spend his weekends and vacation time there.

Conan then went to Haiti and posed for the infamous “beautiful country” photo while sipping a drink out of a coconut.

Now, Dems and the media are telling you it would mean suffering or death for anyone to be sent back there.

Their narrative is wholly dependent on what is deemed to be politically useful at any given time.

Keep reading

‘Grotesque Results’ Of Birth Tourism Allow Foreign Invaders To Seize Control Of U.S. From The Inside

he Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, gave its stamp of approval Tuesday to birth tourism, “the practice of traveling here with temporary authorization solely to give birth and obtain citizenship for one’s children, then returning to raise them in another country,” as Justice Clarence Thomas described in his dissent.

In doing so, Roberts and the high court have given away the country’s sovereignty to random, hostile foreign invaders to take control of the American government in less than a generation.

“The Court has repurposed the Fourteenth Amendment to protect its own set of preferred rights that the Reconstruction Congress never contemplated and that cannot find support in its text,” Thomas wrote. “Today, the Court does so again by recognizing a constitutional right to citizenship for the children of all foreign birth tourists and illegal aliens.”

Thomas wrote about the birth tourism industry, consisting of companies that “reportedly collect large fees from wealthy foreigners to facilitate their trips to give birth in the United States.”

In his dissent Justice Samuel Alito offered a scathing critique of the majority’s approach to the issue. The majority opinion, Alito wrote, went “out of its way to hold that even a child born to a mother who is here for only a brief time is a citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment,” ostensibly because doing otherwise would mean dismantling the entire system of so-called birthplace citizenship, which allows any foreigner anywhere to be considered a “citizen” so long as he was born on American soil.

“Showing merely that the Executive Order is valid as applied to a child born to a birth tourist would be enough to defeat respondents’ facial claim,” Alito said. “The Court’s interpretation is not only contrary to the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, it produces grotesque results. While foreigners who wish to immigrate lawfully must sometimes wait for many years, a child born here to a birth tourist is automatically a citizen.”

Thomas noted another bizarre outcome of the Roberts opinion, stating that it essentially means a Chinese national has more of a claim to American citizenship than an American Indian does.

It is true that tribal Indians belonged to “alien and sovereign” nations and that the United States’ relations with them implicated “intersovereign concerns.” But, temporarily visiting foreigners also belong to “alien and sovereign” nations, and the United States’ relations with them also implicate “intersovereign concerns.” It is difficult to understand why China, for example, would be less alien or less sovereign than the Cherokee Nations. It is also difficult to understand why tribal Indians would be less entitled to American citizenship if born on non-Indian land within the United States than children of birth tourists who immediately returned to China.

As The Federalist’s Brianna Lyman noted, the thousands of Chinese babies whose parents have snatched (and will snatch) citizenship for them through birth tourism in the United States now have a comprehensive claim to the American homeland. All they must do is show up, perhaps at the age of 35, and convince the many millions of foreigners already imported into the United States — and their white liberal enablers — to elect them as president.

Keep reading

DOJ Launches New Crackdown on Birth Tourism After Supreme Court Blocks Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announces on Wednesday DOJ will prioritize prosecutions of birth tourism schemes involving visa fraud as foreign nationals continue exploiting U.S. citizenship loopholes despite yesterday’s 5-4 Supreme Court ruling striking down President Trump’s executive order.

On Tuesday, the Trump Department of Justice directed federal prosecutors across the country to prioritize investigations and prosecutions of birth tourism schemes.

The move, announced just hours after the high court struck down President Trump’s executive order protecting the meaning and value of American citizenship, shows the administration is not backing down. Instead, it is weaponizing existing criminal law against the fraudsters who exploit the loophole.

Assistant Attorney General Colin McDonald issued a department-wide memo Tuesday directing every U.S. Attorney’s office to work closely with DHS on these cases.

Potential charges include visa fraud, money laundering, identity theft, and wire fraud for foreign nationals who come to the United States under “false pretenses” to give birth and secure automatic citizenship for their child.

“The Department of Justice will zealously protect the sanctity of United States citizenship by investigating and prosecuting those who fraudulently exploit our immigration system,” McDonald wrote.

The memo notes that many of these schemes begin with lies on visa applications about the true purpose and length of stay — conduct that has always been illegal. Past prosecutions focused heavily on visa fraud, but the directive makes clear prosecutors should pursue the full range of criminal statutes when the evidence supports it.

Keep reading

It’s Time To Stop Pretending That Migrants Are Entitled To Equal Citizenship

Yet another civil conflict is brewing this week as the Supreme Court tackles a number of foreign citizenship debates, including Temporary Protection Status (TPS) and Birthright Citizenship. The court has ruled that hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian migrants residing in the US under TPS are no longer safe from mass deportations (a win). But, they have also ruled in favor of migrant anchor babies (a big loss).

Both issues deal with changing American perceptions on what is “constitutional” when it comes to foreign access to citizenship. The Supreme Court’s decisions aside, I find it mind boggling that this debate has been ongoing for so many decades. Frankly, foreigners should not have any citizenship rights under the constitution until they have demonstrated assimilation. Until that time, there should be a separate set of rules handling newcomers (and invaders).

When it comes to TPS and the Haitians, the leftists are raging. Despite this status supposedly being “temporary” (the Obama Administration originally claimed these people would only be in the US for 18 months), many of these foreign transplants have been enjoying the benefits of unearned American citizenship for 16 years or more.  Yet, when Haitians protest the TPS decision, what flag do you see them flying?  That’s right – They fly the Haitian flag, not the American flag.  This tells us everything we need to know.

Keep reading

More Than 8 in 10 French Voters Back ‘Negative Immigration’, Support Widespread Deportations

The overwhelming majority of the French public are in favour of a large-scale deportation effort, including the removal of significant numbers of foreigners who detract from society.

A poll conducted by Consumer Science & Analytics (CSA) on behalf of Le Journale du Dimanche has found that 83 per cent of French adults are supportive of the notion of “negative immigration” in which unemployed, criminal, or otherwise delinquent migrants ar deported.

In contrast, the survey found that just 17 per cent of those polled would oppose such deportation efforts.

While the concept is broadly popular among all age groups, surprisingly, it is the youngest voters aged 18 to 24 who are the most supportive of “negative immigration” at 90 per cent approval. The next largest bloc of support was among those over the age of 65 at 87 per cent.

The survey also found broad agreement across socioeconomic classes. However, those at the lower rungs of the economic strata were still more likely than their affluent counterparts to back a large deportation effort by a margin of 84 per cent to 78 per cent.

Unsurprisingly, left-wing voters were less likely to back the idea of negative migration, but even still the poll saw a majority support among leftist parties, including 66 per cent of La France Insoumise (LFI) voters, 68 per cent of Ecologist voters, 75 per cent of Socialist Party voters, and 81 per cent of neo-liberal Macronists.

Support was strongest among Les Républicains voters at 96 per cent, followed by 93 per cent of National Rally supporters.

The poll comes in the wake of the European Parliament agreeing for the first time to allow EU nations to make agreements with third party countries to establish deportation centres outside of the bloc.

Keep reading

France: Louis’ Family Authorizes Release of Migrant Lynching Footage to Refute Lying Globalist Regime Media Claims It Was Merely a “Brawl”

The family of Louis, a 17-year-old French teenager who died after a savage group lynching in Narbonne, in the south of France has authorized the release of footage of the attack to challenge globalist regime media descriptions of the killing as a mere “brawl.”

The family’s decision was made in grief, but also in defiance. Louis’ loved ones do not want his death softened by euphemisms, buried under anonymity or reduced to the sort of neutral language that has become standard in a France losing total control of public order.

Louis, as The Gateway Pundit previously reported, was attacked on the night of June 19 into June 20 in the southern city of Narbonne. He was found unconscious at a construction site with severe head and facial injuries and was later placed in an induced coma.

He died on June 23. His death has become yet another national flashpoint in a country already consumed by debate over migrant youth violence, mass immigration, failed assimilation and the collapse of state authority and public safety.

Five suspects have been arrested in connection with the killing. They have been identified in several reports by first names and initials as Isaac P., 18, Mathias T., 17, Jordan S., 16, Lucas P., 17, and Kilian T., 19.

Three of the suspects are minors. All five have reportedly been remanded in custody, and the case is expected to proceed as a murder investigation following Louis’ death.

Keep reading