America exists as a nation of laws or it exists as a nation of men.

Under this guiding principle, the law always supersedes the interests of individuals and groups. Otherwise, justice fails and the nation falls prey to the arbitrary and capricious whims of tyrants.

Now comes the conundrum of illegal immigration from the Middle East. President Trump promised to curtail Muslim immigration as a protection against Islamic extremism. The president's temporary ban on Islamic immigration from six countries that harbor or support Islamic jihadists is a part of Trump's anti-terrorist agenda.

But what happens when the illegals aren't jihadists or Islamic wolves in sheep's clothing? What if they're Christians, fleeing ISIS in Iraq to save their own skins?

Does the letter of the law apply to them as well? Should there be exceptions made?

A federal judge just blocked the deportation of 1,000 Iraqi illegals on the grounds that to do so puts them at risk of being persecuted or killed. The judge's stay gives these illegals a chance to appeal their deportation.

Judge Mark Goldsmith's reasoning is as follows:

“Each petitioner faces the risk of torture or death on the basis of residence in America and publicized criminal records. Many will also face persecution as a result of a particular religious affiliation,” Goldsmith said.

“While cost and efficiency in administering the immigration system are not illegitimate governmental concerns, such interests pale to the point of evaporation when weighed against the potential lethal harm petitioners may suffer.”

Many of the illegals are Kurds or Chaldean Christians who fled the violence in Iraq as a result of Western regime change and the power vacuum filled by ISIS. Christians were among the first targets for murder by head-chopping Islamic radicals.

But if we favor one type of illegal immigrant over another based on religious preference, does the law then become a complete hypocrisy?

The law must always be upheld or there is no law at all. But exceptions should be considered in extreme cases.

These 1,000 illegals are not nascent Islamic terrorists or Muslim radicals hiding in our midsts. They are people who have come here seeking political asylum from the monsters America claims to be fighting. They are not Central American illegals simply walking across the border into the U.S. seeking only economic advantage.

To send these 1,000 illegals back to Iraq without reviewing them on a case-by-case basis is tantamount to a death sentence. The law can be upheld if the asylum seeking process is followed.

Do you agree with the judge's decision to block the deportation of these 1,000 Iraqis? What would be the best course of action that would best uphold the law and ensure that lives are saved? Let us know what you think in the comment section below.

Source: Conservative Fighters

Facebook Comment
JOIN U.S. HERALD Subscribe for FREE today and find out what's REALLY happening in America!

Send this to a friend