Marche: ‘Acute, Sustained, Profound and Abiding Rage’: Canada Finds Its Voice

2025/08/11 Leave a comment

Good op-ed. But more needed in right and Trump-leaning media…:

The mind-set of Canada is changing, and the shift is cultural as much as economic or political. Since the 1960s, Canadian elites have been rewarded by integration with the United States. The snipers who fought with American forces. The scientists who worked at American labs. The writers who wrote for New York publications. The actors who made it in Hollywood. Mr. Carney himself was an icon of this integration as chair of the board of Bloomberg L.P., the financial news and data giant, as recently as 2023.

As America dismantles its elite institutions one by one, that aspirational connection is dissolving. The question is no longer how to stop comparing ourselves with the United States, but how to escape its grasp and its fate. Justin Trudeau, the former prime minister, used to speak of Canada as a “post-national state,” in which Canadian identity took second place to overcoming historical evils and various vague forms of virtue signaling. That nonsense is over. In several surveys, the overwhelming first choice for what makes the country unique is multiculturalism. This, in a world collapsing into stupid, impoverishing hatreds, is the distinctly Canadian national project.

Even after Covid and the failure to create adequate infrastructure for new Canadians, which lead to a pullback on immigration, Canada still has one of the highest rates of naturalization in the world. This country has always been plural. It has always contained many languages, ethnicities and tribes. The triumph of compromise among difference is the triumph of Canadian history. That seems to be an ideal worth fighting for.

Canada is now stuck in a double reality. In a recent Pew Research Center survey, 59 percent of Canadians identified the United States as the country’s top threat, and 55 percent of Canadians identified the United States as the country’s most important ally. That is both an unsustainable contradiction and also a reality that will probably define the country for the foreseeable future. Canada is divided from America, and America is divided from itself. The relationship between Canada and America rides on that fissure.

Margaret Atwood was, and remains, the ultimate icon of 1960s Canadian nationalism and also one of the great prophets of American dystopia. “No. 1, hating all Americans is stupid,” she told me on “Gloves Off,” a podcast about how Canada can defend itself from America’s new threats. “That’s just silly because half of them would agree with you,” and “even a bunch of them are now having buyers’ regret.”

Large groups of people in Canada, and one assumes in America, too, hope this new animosity will pass with the passing of the Trump administration. “I can’t account for the rhetoric on behalf of our president,” Gov. Janet Mills of Maine said recently on a trip to Nova Scotia. “He doesn’t speak for us when he says those things.” Except he does. The current American ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, is the kind of man you send to a country to alienate it. During the first Trump administration, the State Department had to apologize for offensive remarks he made, which he had at one point denied. He has also said the administration finds Canadians “mean and nasty.” Such insults from such people are a badge of honor.

But it’s the American system — not just its presidency — that is in breakdown. From the Canadian side of the border, it is evident that the American left is in the middle of a grand abdication. No American institution, no matter how wealthy or privileged, seems willing to make any sacrifice for democratic values. If the president is Tony Soprano, the Democratic governors who plead with Canadian tourists to return are the Carmelas. They cluck their disapproval, but they can’t believe anyone would question their decency as they try to get along.

Canada is far from powerless in this new world; we are educated and resourceful. But we are alone in a way we never have been. Our current moment of national self-definition is different from previous nationalisms. It will involve connecting Canada more broadly rather than narrowing its focus. We can show that multiculturalism works, that it remains possible to have an open society that does not consume itself, in which divisions between liberals and conservatives are real and deep-seated but do not fester into violence and loathing. Canada will also have to serve as a connector between the world’s democracies, in a line that stretches from Taiwan and South Korea, across North America, to Poland and Ukraine.

Canada has experienced the second Trump administration like a teenager being kicked out of the house by an abusive father. We have to grow up fast and we can’t go back. And the choices we make now will matter forever. They will reveal our national character. Anger is a useful emotion, but only as a point of departure. We have to reckon with the fact that from now on, our power will come from only ourselves.

Source: ‘Acute, Sustained, Profound and Abiding Rage’: Canada Finds Its Voice

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

USA: New Immigration Service Director May Pursue An Anti-Immigration Agenda

2025/08/08 Leave a comment

Incorrect title – not “may” but “will:”

The new director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will likely focus the agency on the Trump administration’s anti-immigration agenda. On July 15, 2025, Joseph Edlow began as USCIS director following a Senate confirmation vote along party lines. Edlow’s job will be to implement the policies of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. The agenda will include restricting asylum, directing adjudicators to tighten the approval process for immigration benefits applications and ending or controlling the ability of international students to work in the United States after graduating from U.S. universities.

USCIS Will Be An Immigration Enforcement Agency

In an opening statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation, Joseph Edlow said, “USCIS must be an immigration enforcement agency.” That sends a message to adjudicators: Treat applications similarly to those during Donald Trump’s first term, when denials increased and Requests for Evidence skyrocketed at USCIS.

In a question submitted to Edlow, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL), the committee’s ranking member, wrote, “The Homeland Security Act does not include language stating that USCIS is an immigration enforcement agency. . . . The statute makes clear that unlike ICE and Customs and Border Protection, USCIS’s primary mission is adjudication and processing of applications, not enforcement. Will you retract your inaccurate statement that ‘USCIS must be an immigration enforcement agency?’” Edlow replied in writing, “No. The statement was not inaccurate as the adjudication of immigration benefits is inherently an act of enforcement of the immigration laws.”

Jon Wasden of Wasden Law said the USCIS transition from a “service” to an “enforcement” agency began under Barack Obama and intensified during Donald Trump’s first term. He notes that even during the Biden administration, USCIS continued to take funds and reallocate them to the Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate within USCIS, which he believes violates the Homeland Security Act. Wasden is harsh in his assessment: “Both parties have created an environment where applicants are seen as the enemy, treated as criminals, and officers are above the law. I wish I could lay all this at the feet of Stephen Miller, but his Democrat predecessors share the blame.”

Still, USCIS differed significantly under Joe Biden compared to Trump’s first term. The Biden administration’s final rule on H-1B visas proved to be far more favorable for employers, universities and high-skilled foreign nationals than anything produced during the Trump years. Policy experts viewed the Trump administration’s interim final rule on H-1B visas, which a court blocked for violating the Administrative Procedure Act, as designed to prevent, or at least discourage, employers from using the H-1B category by narrowing eligibility and piling on requirements. A Department of Labor interim final rule would have priced many H-1B visa holders and employment-based immigrants out of the U.S. labor market by inflating the required salaries.

“Positive actions the Biden administration took on high-skilled immigration included taking steps to issue an ‘unprecedented’ number of employment-based green cards, increasing the validity of Employment Authorization Documents for up to five years, providing favorable guidance for O-1A visas and national interest waivers and making it easier for some employment-based green card applicants to stay if they have ‘compelling circumstances,” according to a National Foundation for American Policy analysis. “O-1A visa filings and requests for national interest waivers increased significantly after the new guidance.”

The NFAP analysis noted that the Trump administration carried out what judges found to be unlawful policies on H-1B visas for nearly four years. An H-1B is often the only practical way for a high-skilled foreign national, including an international student, to work long term in the United States. Denial rates for H-1B petitions for initial employment reached 24% in FY 2018 and 21% in FY 2019, compared to 6% in FY 2015. (H-1B petitions for “initial” employment are primarily for new employment, typically a case that would count against the H-1B annual limit.) Only lawsuits, court rulings and a legal settlement ended the policies.

Source: New Immigration Service Director May Pursue An Anti-Immigration Agenda

Filed under Citizenship, Immigration Tagged with , ,

Rempel Garner: Without national identity, integration is impossible and collapse is inevitable.

2025/08/02 Leave a comment

Always worth reading the Conservative take on immigration policy even when overly partisan and exaggerated in places. Some of her critiques have some merit but are weakened by being overstated. And to ignore broader trends on belonging and pinning everything on the Trudeau government is shallow at best:

…For example, on immigration, the Trudeau Liberals narrowed the age range for mandatory language and knowledge requirements in citizenship applications from 14-64 to 18-54, thus diminishing shared language’s role in Canadian identity for newcomers. They eliminated the in-person citizenship oath requirement. They sought to erase references to practices like female genital mutilation as abhorrent in the citizenship study guide, and in so doing, arguably normalized their importation into Canada. They turned a blind eye to judicial rulings allowing immigration status to factor into sentencing violent criminals, valuing the process of entry into the country over the responsibility associated with citizenship. They allowed Canada’s compassionate asylum system to be abused into a mockery.

The Trudeau Liberals also normalized the practice of the importation of conflicts from newcomer’s countries of origin, rather than primarily encouraging the shedding of these quarrels in favour of a pluralistic, unified Canadian identity rooted in Western democratic values. This phenomenon is best exemplified via the Trudeau government’s tolerance of diasporic lobby groups’ influence in elections and Canadian institutions, while simultaneously turning a blind eye to groups who sought to plant international conflicts and even terrorist principles in Canadian soil. And despite clear evidence of rising foreign interference in elections, the Liberals have yet to implement a foreign agent registry.

The Trudeau Liberals also prioritized cultural and ethnic differences over a shared ethos of equality in hiring and storytelling. For example, they embedded divisive, quasi-racist hiring policies into federal funding for educational institutions. They allowed Canada’s publicly funded national broadcaster to consider abandoning objectivity for racialized narratives, and now allocate news funding based on whether or not outlets sufficiently highlight ethnic, religious, and other group differences.

And rather than enlisting newcomers to help strengthen a cohesive Canadian national identity, such as by constructively addressing the nation’s historic injustices while simultaneously celebrating its positive achievements, the Trudeau Liberals actively erased symbols of shared historic Canadian identity from public view. They redesigned the Canadian passport to replace images of Canadian national heroes like Terry Fox with inert objects like a wheelbarrow. They supported activities that established the Canadian flag as a symbol of shame as opposed to a representation of patriotism. They worked to erase Canada’s founders from places of prominence.

Thus, Canada’s political left has profoundly succeeded in transforming Canada into a post-national no-nation, free from the trappings of a cohesive national identity.

For those who might argue that this is a good thing, they are very wrong. 

What Justin Trudeau overlooked in his Liberal government’s zealous pursuit of post-nationalism is that his father’s multicultural vision could only thrive under robust Western democratic institutions. Without a government prioritizing above all else, especially over partisan ideology, the safeguarding of principles like freedom of speech, secularism, and equality of opportunity, multiculturalism will inevitably destroy a peaceful, democratic pluralism.

The proof is in the pudding. Today in Canada, after decades of post-national, national identity-destroying policies, less than half of Canadian youth say they would fight for the country. This marks a startling shift from generations ago, when Canadians fought for what seemed to be immutable freedoms in the Great Wars. Diasporic conflicts now erupt on Canadian streets, hate crimes against ethnic and religious groups have surged, and the once-strong Canadian consensus on immigration is solidly broken.

If Canadians want to reverse the pluralism-destroying course post-nationalism has set us on, everyone, regardless of political stripe, must acknowledge that post-nationalism has eroded Canada’s national identity to point of non-existence. That state of affairs is likely the biggest threat to Canada’s sovereignty today.

History proves this conclusion correct. For a civilization to survive the test of history it needs some sort of cohesive shared identity. Without it, collapse occurs. There’s even examples to be found within Canada’s own evolution in the 20th century. In the early 1900s a Canadian national identity had taken root in spite of high levels of immigration. Forged in the crucibles of battlefields like Vimy Ridge, peoples of many backgrounds fought together as Canadians, united by shared values of democracy, rule of law, bilingualism, and loyalty to the Crown. To be Canadian then was to embrace English or French as a primary language, respect parliamentary institutions, and demonstrate civic duty through collective efforts in war and nation-building. 

Fast forward to today. Our domestic efforts fail to build critical national infrastructure and have allowed our military to atrophy to the point of near non-functionality. Our foreign policy rewards the tactics of terrorist organizations and abandons Western allies in times of crisis. Logic dictates that if the Liberal government continues eroding the Western democratic values that once, but arguably no longer, underpin Canada’s rapidly disappearing pluralistic national identity (freedom of speech, freedom of worship, and equality in the rule of law’s application), then collapse is what should be expected of Canada’s once-vaunted pluralism.

Those looking for remedy from new Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney will likely be sorely disappointed. Long an adherent to the World Economic Forum’s globalist brand of post-nationalism, the best definition of Canada’s national identity he has mustered is that we’re not the United States. His new “Minister of National Identity” Stephen Guilbeault managed an arguably worse response, offering pithiness like “I won’t stand here and pretend that I can tell you what Canadian identity is or should be,” while arguing there is “no one way to be Canadian.” That neither could define Canadian identity as rooted in shared respect for things like the rule of Western-based law, freedom of speech, freedom to worship, and equality of opportunity is telling.

The reality for Mr. Carney is that his government must reverse the many changes Mr. Trudeau made under his aggressive post-national doctrine to order to rebuild Canada’s national identity, prevent pluralism’s collapse, and retain our sovereignty.

If he fails, the effect will be the same as if he were to tip over Cardiff’s speakers in the National Gallery: a shameful and purposeful squandering of an intricate, delicate masterpiece.

Source: Without national identity, integration is impossible and collapse is inevitable.

Filed under Citizenship, Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with

Trump Administration Releases New Plans to Enforce Birthright Citizenship Order

2025/08/02 Leave a comment

Good overview:

Current Birthright Citizenship Rules vs. Proposed Changes

While the executive order is not yet in effect, recent documents from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the State Department, and the Social Security Administration (SSA) outline the administration’s intended approach. The proposed strategy involves implementing stricter requirements for parents to obtain U.S. passports, Social Security numbers (SSNs), and federal benefits for their U.S.-born children.

How It Currently Works

  • A child’s U.S. birth certificate is considered sufficient proof of U.S. citizenship, and parents can present it to the government to get a passport, SSN, and federal benefits for their child.
  • Parents don’t need to prove their own citizenship or immigration status when applying for these documents or benefits on their U.S.-born child’s behalf (except in cases involving foreign diplomats, who aren’t considered under U.S. jurisdiction).

How It Would Work Under the Proposed Plan

  • For any child born in the U.S. after the executive order’s effective date, their U.S. birth certificate alone is not considered sufficient proof of U.S. citizenship, and parents will need to provide additional documentation to obtain a passport, SSN, or federal benefits for their child.
  • At least one parent would need to prove their own citizenship or eligible immigration status when applying for these documents or benefits on their U.S.-born child’s behalf.
  • Federal agencies would verify parental status during or after birth registration.
  • Federal documents recognizing U.S. citizenship are not issued to children whose parents lack qualifying status.

“Ending birthright citizenship by fiat in contravention of several existing court challenges is an effort destined for failure. In the meantime, it will only create chaos and confusion in many households already struggling to navigate our broken immigration system.” — Erik Finch | Director of Global Operations, Boundless Immigration | Former USCIS Officer

Implications for Individuals and Families

Restricted birthright citizenship would have profound consequences on individuals and families:

  • Family Planning and Uncertainty: Legal ambiguities would likely deter many immigrant and mixed-status families from having children in the U.S., leading some to delay or reconsider building their families there.
  • Risk of Statelessness: Children denied citizenship at birth — especially if their parents’ home countries cannot confer nationality — could become stateless, facing lifelong barriers to education, healthcare, travel, and legal protection.
  • Reduced Access to Services: Even the threat of this policy’s implementation is likely to discourage families from seeking healthcare or essential public services, worsening health and welfare outcomes.
  • Bureaucratic and Legal Challenges: Stricter documentation rules could cause errors, delays, or denials, increasing stress and potential legal limbo for families.

Implications for Employers

Employers that depend on global talent could face serious challenges:

  • Recruitment and Retention: Uncertainty around children’s citizenship may deter skilled foreign professionals from working in or staying in the U.S.
  • HR Complexity and Compliance: Varied state laws could complicate HR, payroll, and benefits administration, requiring greater investment in immigration support for employees and their families.
  • Risk of Discrimination: Increased scrutiny of family and citizenship status raises the risk of accidental anti-discrimination violations and workplace unfairness.
  • Employee Wellbeing and Productivity: Ongoing anxiety about family status can lower morale, productivity, and long-term workforce stability, ultimately impacting company competitiveness.

Broader Social and Economic Implications

Fewer foreign-born residents and their U.S.-citizen children would reduce population diversity, shrink the workforce, and limit innovation. Communities of color — especially Latino families — would be disproportionately affected, deepening existing inequalities and creating long-term disparities. Over time, this could lead to a rise in U.S.-born individuals without legal status or statehood, increasing poverty, exclusion, and instability.

In addition, the proposed policy could expand the undocumented immigrant population, strain the U.S. immigration system, and fuel long-term political tension. Denying birthright citizenship risks alienating immigrant communities, weakening social cohesion, and creating a stateless underclass with limited access to education, jobs, and stability.

Even as a proposal, the policy has already sparked confusion and anxiety, leading some families to avoid essential services and underscoring the urgent need for clear guidance and community support.

Multiple court rulings have blocked the executive order, and it’s unclear if or when the administration’s plans will take effect. However, the government’s ongoing preparations suggests the issue will remain a priority for the Trump administration.


The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and state attorneys general have called the order unconstitutional and vowed to continue fighting it in court. Immigration advocates have reassured families that, for now, children born in the U.S. remain U.S. citizens regardless of their parents’ status, and no immediate action is required.

Source: Trump Administration Releases New Plans to Enforce Birthright Citizenship Order

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

Number of US expats to climb throughout 2025

2025/08/01 2 Comments

From the citizenship-by-investment marketing firm Aston’s. Still relatively small number for a country with such a large population of millionaires and ultra wealthy:

Number of US expats set to reach 5,000 per year in 2025

The latest analysis from Astons, reveals that the number of US citizens choosing to leave the States is forecast to hit almost 5,000 by the end of this year, marking the highest annual total since 2020.

Astons’ analysis of US Federal Register data* reveals that in 2024 an estimated 4,819 US citizens chose to expatriate themselves and settle in another country.

This marked an annual increase of 47.8%.

Further data shows that following this annual increase, the number of US expats has continued to increase at an incredibly sharp rate, with the first quarter of 2025 recording a rise of 102.4% compared to the final quarter of 2024.

This means that in the first three months of this year alone, an estimated 1,285 US citizens become expatriates.

Based on these recent trends, Astons’ now estimates that by the end of 2025, the total number of US citizens expatriating themselves will reach 4,936 – based on the most conservative of forecasts.

This will be equivalent to an annual increase of 2.4%, and mark the highest number of US citizens leaving America in a single year since 2020, the height of the pandemic.

Senior Consultant for Residency and Citizenship Programs at Astons, Suzanna Uzakova, commented:

“We’re seeing a significant shift in the mindset of affluent Americans who are no longer just looking to invest their money wisely, they’re actively seeking new homes and lifestyles beyond U.S. borders. The rising cost of living, political uncertainty, and a desire for greater personal freedoms are pushing many to explore permanent residency abroad.

Europe is especially attractive thanks to its quality of life, healthcare, and cultural richness. Among all European destinations, Greece has emerged as a standout choice — not just for its beauty, but for its accessible Golden Visa programme, favourable tax incentives, and lifestyle that blends luxury with a much sought-after simplicity.

The investment required to access Greece’s Golden Visa programme starts from just €250,000 provided it goes into real estate – making it one of the most affordable residency-by-investment routes in Europe. For many Americans, Greece offers the perfect balance: EU access, property investment potential, and a relaxed pace of life that feels a world away from the rush back home.”

Data tables and sources
*US expat data sourced from the US IRS (US Federal Register)

Full data tables can be viewed online, here.

Filed under Citizenship, citizenship-by-investment Tagged with ,

USA: Despite grand claims, a new report shows noncitizen voting hasn’t materialized

2025/07/31 Leave a comment

No surprise. Unfortunately, will not change many minds:

After President Trump and many other Republicans warned that vast numbers of non-U.S. citizens would influence last year’s election, states and law enforcement have devoted more resources than ever before to root out those ineligible voters.

More than six months into Trump’s second term, they haven’t found much.

New research out Wednesday tracking state government efforts across the country confirms what election experts have said all along: Noncitizen voting occasionally happens but in minuscule numbers, and not in any coordinated way.

“Noncitizens are not a large threat to our election system currently,” said David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research (CEIR), which conducted the research. “Even states that are looking everywhere to try to amplify the numbers of noncitizens … when they actually look, they find a surprisingly, shockingly small number.”

Source: Despite grand claims, a new report shows noncitizen voting hasn’t materialized

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Canadian passport continues to plummet in power according to new global ranking. How does it compare to other countries?

2025/07/30 Leave a comment

What a silly, stupid and misleading headline, dropping one level hardly plummeting:

Over the last two decades, the Canadian passport has been one of the world’s strongest but a recent report suggests it is plummeting. 

Canada’s passport ties with Estonia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) at 8th place out of 199 in the world with visa-free access to 184 countries, according to the latest data from Henley Passport Index . 

The recent ranking shows the Canadian passport is down from seventh place since the last index update in January, losing visa-free access to four nations while seeing a much larger drop from Canada’s 2014 peak when it ranked second. 

Although the Canadian passport has consistently ranked within the top 10 globally, in recent years, other countries are gaining visa-free access to destinations quicker than Canada, which is among five countries to have seen the largest plunge in rankings over the past decade. 

Here’s how Canada’s passport ranks compared to other countries including the U.S. 

Which countries have the most powerful passports?

Singapore’s passport has once again topped the list allowing citizens to enter 193 destinations out of a possible 227 without a prior visa. On the other end of the spectrum, Afghanistan remains at the bottom of the list, with its passport gaining visa-free access to just 25 countries— a massive mobility gap of 168 countries compared to Singapore. 

Other Asian countries are also topping the list, with Japan and South Korea tied for second place, giving holders visa-free access to 190 countries. 

Seven European nations take the third spot with visa-free access to 189 countries, including Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy and Spain. The fourth and fifth places are also largely dominated by other European countries, but New Zealand is the one outlier who shares fifth place with Europe’s Greece and Switzerland. 

Since six months ago, India has seen the largest jump in ranking, shooting up from 85th place to 77th with citizens granted access to 59 visa-free destinations, but only gaining entrance to two additional countries. In the latest data, Saudi Arabian citizens can now travel to 91 countries after adding four destinations, making this the largest gain in visa-free access from all passports since the start of the year. 

Source: Canadian passport continues to plummet in power according to new global ranking. How does it compare to other countries?

Filed under Citizenship, Passports Tagged with

Thompson: Trump is wielding U.S. citizenship as a weapon

2025/07/26 Leave a comment

Well, we will see where this ends up at SCOTUS but yes, the weaponization intent and actions are clear:

…Whether this particular legal battle will become a preoccupation of the Trump administration, amid so many other executive orders and attempts at presidential overreach, remains to be seen. But should Mr. Trump decide that the attack on birthright citizenship is a battle he wants to wage (or a useful distraction to draw attention away from the Epstein files), the implications are astounding. 

Birthright citizenship is not the only or even the most popular way that countries denote who can and cannot hold rights, participate in the political sphere, and be an irrevocable member of the political community. But in the United States, it is a core constitutional right. It has both a symbolic weight and offers fundamental legal protections in a country perpetually at odds over who truly belongs. 

This most recent attack is undeniably ideological. In Mr. Trump’s worldview, birthright citizenship is tightly tied with his priorities to curb immigration, secure borders and redefine American identity. Citizenship is most often associated with the right to vote, but more importantly confers the right to remain. To leave and come back. You cannot be denied entry to your own country, my brother, who decades ago worked as a Canadian immigration officer, once told me. They have to let you come home.

The Trump administration claims that its efforts will preserve and protect the meaning and value of American citizenship. They are instead an attempt to wield citizenship as a weapon. This executive order threatens to limit access to citizenship for the masses and will inevitably increase the administrative burden of proving citizenship for those for whom it has previously been automatic. Mr. Trump has threatened to revoke citizenship from his political opponents (or those he just doesn’t like), enabled the Department of Justice to strip citizenship from naturalized Americans charged with certain crimes, and created a path for wealthy foreigners to buy it through the “gold card” program for the low, low price of US$5-million. 

The proposed end to birthright citizenship is the hallmark policy of an America that seeks to close and bolt its doors to the huddled masses. The deeper lesson, however, is that nothing is absolute or untouchable, even and perhaps especially the constitutional order. Everything can be undone.

Source: Trump is wielding U.S. citizenship as a weapon

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with

Trump has a welcome message for new citizens. It’s different from past presidents

2025/07/22 Leave a comment

Of note (relatively restrained for him):

Over the past two decades, it’s become a tradition for each president to craft their own speech to welcome new citizens.

These video messages, played at naturalization ceremonies nationwide, are brief but experts in presidential rhetoric say they are important — not only are they meaningful to newly naturalized citizens, but they provide insight on how each president values immigration and their broader vision for the country.

President Trump, whose second term has been marked by his hardline approach to immigration, released a new naturalization ceremony video last month.

“Today you receive one of the most priceless gifts ever granted by human hands. You become a citizen of the United States of America,” Trump said.

Trump went on to welcome new citizens into the “national family,” adding that they now have a responsibility to “fiercely guard” and preserve American culture, including the freedom of speech, religion and the right to bear arms. 

“ That fits into his larger narrative, but that’s not usually what you see at an American naturalization ceremony.  It’s much more of a celebration and I’m not saying that Trump doesn’t celebrate those ideas, but it’s less celebratory than his predecessors,” said Jason Edwards, a communications professor at  Bridgewater State University in Massachusetts who has studied presidential welcomes to new citizens. 

Departure from past presidents’ remarks

Only a handful of presidents have delivered remarks at naturalization ceremonies, either through video or in person. That includes Gerald Ford, George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Biden. 

Edwards said most have centered their message on how immigrants enrich and renew the country whereas Trump’s remarks emphasized what the U.S. has to offer new citizens.

“No matter where you come from, you now share a home and a heritage with some of the most exceptional heroes, legends, and patriots to ever walk the face of the earth,” Trump said in his speech. 

“ There’s no heterogeneity, there’s no celebration of diversity, there’s no celebration of past immigrants,” Edwards said.

A spokesman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, which released Trump’s video, said his message is “an essential one” and would be part of naturalization ceremonies moving forward.

That message: “U.S. citizenship is a privilege and reserved for those who respect our laws, culture, and history,” USCIS spokesman Matthew Tragesser said in a press release about the video. 

In both his first and second term, Trump avoided using the word “immigrant” altogether in his video message congratulating new citizens. That also strayed from his predecessors, who often called the U.S. a nation of immigrants and acknowledged the journey that newcomers took to become American citizens. 

Biden, for example, spoke about immigrants’ sacrifices and courage, adding that his own ancestors immigrated to the U.S. from Ireland.

“I don’t wanna say it’s an erasure, but it’s wanting to kind of erase that idea — you’re no longer an immigrant, you are a citizen,” Edwards said, referring to Trump’s remarks.

Instead, Trump shifted the focus to the idea of a “national family,” which often implies loyalty and obligation, according to Matthew Eshbaugh-Soha, a political science professor at the University of North Texas. 

Eshbaugh-Soha added the emphasis on family and the explicit reference to the right to bear arms are consistent with traditional conservative values — which is also unusual for ceremonial speeches like naturalization events. 

“That idea of American family is very much in line with this idea of America first,” he said. 

Generally, Trump’s rhetoric on immigration has intensified during his second term, especially during his most recent presidential campaign, according to Jennifer Mercieca, a historian of American political rhetoric at Texas A&M University.

“ The metaphors that he used about immigration, whether it was an invasion, whether immigrants were poisoning the blood of the nation and things like that,” Mercieca said. “Those are very salient ways of talking about immigration and  very different from the ways that previous presidents have done.”

Source: Trump has a welcome message for new citizens. It’s different from past presidents

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Nationwide injunction blocking Trump’s birthright citizenship order goes into effect

2025/07/21 Leave a comment

Of note:

President Donald Trump’s plan to end birthright citizenship for the children of people who are in the U.S. illegally will remain blocked as an order from one judge went into effect Friday and another seemed inclined to follow suit.

U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week his order went into effect.

“The judge’s order protects every single child whose citizenship was called into question by this illegal executive order,” Cody Wofsy, the ACLU attorney representing children who would be affected by Trump’s restrictions, said. “The government has not appealed and has not sought emergency relief so this injunction is now in effect everywhere in the country.”

The Trump administration could still appeal or even ask that LaPlante’s order be narrowed but the effort to end birthright citizenship for children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally or temporarily can’t take effect for now.

The Justice Department didn’t immediately return a message seeking comment.

Meanwhile, a judge in Boston heard arguments from more than a dozen states who say Trump’s birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for essential services. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation’s highest court.

U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin was asked to consider either keeping in place the nationwide injunction he granted earlier or consider a request from the government either to narrow the scope of that order or stay it altogether. Sorokin, located in Boston, did not immediately rule but seemed to be receptive to arguments from states to keep the injunction in place….

Source: Nationwide injunction blocking Trump’s birthright citizenship order goes into effect

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship, Trump administration Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →