David Bier of the Cato Institute writes that Muslim immigrants (4M, 60% of whom are first generation immigrants) assimilate more than is suggested by standard polling. Nearly one in four Americans raised Muslim are no longer Muslim. Their personal additudes often are closer to broader U.S. public opinion. On issues such as homosexuality, religious pluralism, interfaith marriage, scriptural literalism, and the role of religion in law, Muslims here are markedly more liberal than Muslims in most majority-Muslim countries. They become more liberal over time. American Muslims show strong rejection of terrorism and extremist movements, often at levels equal to or stronger than the general public. In sum, Muslim immigrants do assimilate. (Also go here).

Note: Among the 250,000 persons of Somali descent, about half live in Minnesota.

To start at the start: in January 2025, Executive Order No. 14160 (Birthright Citizenship Executive Order.) declared that many children born in the United States to undocumented (and certain temporary-status) parents would not receive automatic U.S. citizenship. Many suits were filed  including by CASA de Maryland (CASA), a membership-based immigrant advocacy organization founded in 1985 and headquartered in Maryland and with partners and operations regionally and nationally.

CASA argued the order violated the Fourteenth Amendment, United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), and the Immigration and Nationality Act. In mid 2025, when offered the chance, the Supreme Court did not decide on the executive order. This substantive issue remained for the lower courts, which have uniformly blocked the executive order.

The case now before the Court is Trump v. CASA.  The issue: does “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” of the 14^th amendment allow the federal government to exclude children of unauthorized or temporarily present noncitizens from birthright citizenship? Formally stated, the issue: Whether Executive Order No. 14160 complies on its face with the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment and with 8 U.S.C. § 1401(a), which codifies that clause.

I want to address here a leading argument of the government. It says that children born of two unauthorized persons are not “subject to” the laws of the U.S, per the 14^th amendment because they do not have “allegiance” to the U.S. On this view, children of unauthorized migrants lack full allegiance because their parents were not lawfully admitted, while children of lawful immigrants inherit sufficient allegiance through recognized status.

In United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) the Court held that birth on U.S. soil confers citizenship except for narrow, settled exceptions (e.g., diplomats, native Americans, invading forces). “Jurisdiction” meant being subject to U.S. law. It made no carve out for any type of immigrant and did not mention political allegiance. There is no post–Wong Kim Ark precedent at any federal court on an allegiance requirement.  The modern allegiance argument is largely a reinterpretation.

Roughly 6.8 million Syrians fled the country as refugees during the Assad years, on top of millions more displaced inside Syria. Since the regime’s fall in December 2024, about 1.2 million refugees have gone back to Syria, leaving over 5 million refugees still abroad. (here and here.)

I am concentrating here on northern Europe, as these countries offer the highest standard of living of all hosting countries and the experience there can be compared to that of refugees in the U.S. In Germany, the Syrian‑origin population peaked around 1.2 million. The UK peak was on the order of 40,000, mostly in London. Sweden received about 200,000 Syrian‑born residents at peak. The rest of Scandinavia and the Benelux countries received about 175,000. Thus, overall in northern Europe, around 1.6 million out of the total of 6.8 million.

We need to know how the outflow happened. Early on, early activists and civic leaders fled targeted persecution in 2011–2012. Many of them are skilled workers. A second, larger group escaped intense violence between 2012 and 2015.  A third group left after economic collapse and conscription risks. (Go here).

10% of practicing doctors in Germany are immigrants, and the largest share of these foreign born doctors are Syrians. They perform one role which foreign born doctors in the U.S. do, which is to work often in rural and under-served areas. For those with more limited formal skills, returning to Syria is complicated by the continuing unrest in the country.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) stated in January 2025 that “EU countries must not force Syrian refugees to return amid ongoing instability and political uncertainty in the country,” citing UNHCR advice against forced returns. (Go here.) It warned that rushing returns “would violate refugees’ rights and could create further instability.” Conditions in Syria “do not yet allow for safe, voluntary and dignified return on a large scale” and stresses that returns should “take place strictly on a voluntary basis, in line with the principle of non‑refoulement, standard of global refugee since the 1950s.

Germany has close about one million people of Syrian origin, but only a tiny fraction (on the order of a few thousand have actually returned. The chancellor has said there are “no longer any grounds for asylum” for Syrians and that “we can also begin with repatriations,”

Denmark is the northern European country that is most conspicuous in trying to induce return. It has reviewed protection for Syrians from areas it labels “safe” (Damascus, Rif Damascus, parts of the coast), withdrawn or not renewed status for dozens, and moved some people into return centers where they cannot work or study, creating what in the UK is called a “hostile environment.”

Nationality at birth of the top 25-30 global AI experts:  30–35% were born in the United States. Europe, roughly 25–30%; East Asia,  20–25%; South Asia, 5–10%. largely from India; rest of the world, 5–10%. About 60% of the top 25-20 reside in the U.S. today.

Top executives of major AI firms headquartered in the United States: 60–70% born in the United States. 15–20% in Europe, 5–10% in East Asia, 5% in South Asia. 5–10% elsewhere.

Of the top universities regarded as global leaders in AI, most are in the U.S. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, Carnegie Mellon University, University of California, Berkeley, and University of Washington. Outside the United States, major centers include University of Toronto in Canada, University of Oxford and University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom, and Tsinghua University in China.

The government brief on birthright citizenship was submitted to the Supreme Court, in Trump v Barbara. Currently, birthright citizenship is 100% assured except in very limited circumstances, such as being a child of a diplomat. This virtually complete right is tied by courts to the 14^th amendment which reads:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

The government brief takes a circuitous route to redefine “subject to the jurisdiction.” It introduces the term “primary allegiance” – the child must have primary allegiance to be subject to the jurisdiction. This term and its definition is not nailed down in past court decisions. The brief ties the term to immigration categories, such as illegal status, temporary status, adding another term “domicile.” If a child cannot claims domicile status, it is not given citizenship.

If one peels away these terms, one gets to a core, “originalist” interpretation, that Congress retains the right to create and quality immigration status categories and domcile and primary allegience, and thereby citizenship rights of newborns. Thus, for example, assume there is a 10-year working visa program. Congress could define this program in a way to deny citizenship status of children born to such parents.

Because this is fundamentally an originalist argument, there will be justics such as Thomas and Alito who will support the government’s position. Perhaps Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.  Hence, it could be a close vote and go either way.

A very Happy Thanksgiving to all of our Great American Citizens and patriots who have been so nice in the allowing our Country to be divided, disrupted, carved up, murdered, beaten, mugged, and laughed at, along with certain other foolish countries throughout the world for being politically correct, and just plain STUPID, when it comes to immigration. The official United States foreign population stands at 53 million people (Census), most of which are on welfare, from failed nations, or from prisons, mental institutions, gangs, or drug cartels. They and their children are supported through massive payments from Patriotic American Citizens who, because of their beautiful heart, do not want to openly complain or cause trouble in any way, shape, or form. They put up with what has happened to our Country, but it’s eating them alive to do so. A migrant earning $30,000 a year with a green card can get roughly $50,000 in yearly benefits for their family. The real migrant population is much higher. The refugee burden is the leading cause of social dysfunction in America, something that did not exist after World War II (Failed schools, high crime, urban decay, overcrowded hospitals, housing shortage, and large deficits, etc.) As an example, hundreds of thousands of refugees from Somalia are completely taking over the once great state of Minnesota. Somalian gangs are roving the streets looking for prey, as our wonderful people stay locked in their apartments and houses, hoping against hope that they will be left alone. The seriously retarded Governor of Minnesota Tim Walz does nothing, either through fear, incompetence, or both, while the worst congresswoman in our country. Ihan Omar, always wrapped in her swaddling hijab and who probably came into the US.A. illegally in that you were not allowed to marry your brother, does nothing but hatefully complain about our Country, its constitution, and how “badly” she is treated, one for when her place of origin is a decadent, backward, and crime ridden nation, which is essentially not even a country for lack of government, military, please, schools, etcetera.

[NOTE:  On Thanksgiving Day the death was announced of the National Guard member Sarah Beckstrom, stationed in D.C. and murdered by a former CIA-hired Afghan. Asked if he’ll attend the funeral of Beckstrom, Trump said: “It’s certainly something I can conceive of… I won West Virginia by one of the biggest margins of any president anywhere.”]

Some 43% of Hispanics in the U.S. identify themselves as being Catholic. (20% of all Americans identify as Catholic.)

ICE on November 1, in Chicago, turned away a delegation of clergy, including a Catholic bishop, who wanted to bring the detained Catholics holy Communion on the Catholic feast of All Saints

Pope Leo said on November 4, quoting from the Gospel of Mathew: “”Jesus says very clearly at the end of the world, we’re going to be asked, you know, how did you receive the foreigner? Did you receive him and welcome him or not? And I think that there’s a deep reflection that needs to be made in terms of what’s happening. Many people who’ve lived for years and years and years, never causing problems, have been deeply affected by what’s going on right now.”

The American bishops issued a statement:

“We oppose the indiscriminate mass deportation of people. We pray for an end to dehumanizing rhetoric and violence, whether directed at immigrants or at law enforcement.”

The complete statement:

As pastors, we the bishops of the United States are bound to our people by ties of communion and compassion in Our Lord Jesus Christ. We are disturbed when we see among our people a climate of fear and anxiety around questions of profiling and immigration enforcement. We are saddened by the state of contemporary debate and the vilification of immigrants. We are concerned about the conditions in detention centers and the lack of access to pastoral care. We lament that some immigrants in the United States have arbitrarily lost their legal status. We are troubled by threats against the sanctity of houses of worship and the special nature of hospitals and schools. We are grieved when we meet parents who fear being detained when taking their children to school and when we try to console family members who have already been separated from their loved ones.

Despite obstacles and prejudices, generations of immigrants have made enormous contributions to the well-being of our nation. We as Catholic bishops love our country and pray for its peace and prosperity. For this very reason, we feel compelled now in this environment to raise our voices in defense of God-given human dignity.

Catholic teaching exhorts nations to recognize the fundamental dignity of all persons, including immigrants. We bishops advocate for a meaningful reform of our nation’s immigration laws and procedures. Human dignity and national security are not in conflict. Both are possible if people of good will work together.

We recognize that nations have a responsibility to regulate their borders and establish a just and orderly immigration system for the sake of the common good. Without such processes, immigrants face the risk of trafficking and other forms of exploitation. Safe and legal pathways serve as an antidote to such risks.

The Church’s teaching rests on the foundational concern for the human person, as created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:27). As pastors, we look to Sacred Scripture and the example of the Lord Himself, where we find the wisdom of God’s compassion. The priority of the Lord, as the Prophets remind us, is for those who are most vulnerable: the widow, the orphan, the poor, and the stranger (Zechariah 7:10). In the Lord Jesus, we see the One who became poor for our sake (2 Corinthians 8:9), we see the Good Samaritan who lifts us from the dust (Luke 10:30–37), and we see the One who is found in the least of these (Matthew 25). The Church’s concern for neighbor and our concern here for immigrants is a response to the Lord’s command to love as He has loved us (John 13:34).

To our immigrant brothers and sisters, we stand with you in your suffering, since, when one member suffers, all suffer (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:26). You are not alone!

We note with gratitude that so many of our clergy, consecrated religious, and lay faithful already accompany and assist immigrants in meeting their basic human needs. We urge all people of good will to continue and expand such efforts.

We oppose the indiscriminate mass deportation of people. We pray for an end to dehumanizing rhetoric and violence, whether directed at immigrants or at law enforcement. We pray that the Lord may guide the leaders of our nation, and we are grateful for past and present opportunities to dialogue with public and elected officials. In this dialogue, we will continue to advocate for meaningful immigration reform.

As disciples of the Lord, we remain men and women of hope, and hope does not disappoint! (cf. Romans 5:5) May the mantle of Our Lady of Guadalupe enfold us all in her maternal and loving care and draw us ever closer to the heart of Christ.

 

 

 

The American Enterprise Institute in 2015:

“[Nicolas] Eberstadt [of the American Enterprise Institute] sees US demographic trends as mostly positive. The US, the world’s third-most-populous country (321.4 million people) and largest economy (GDP of $18.1 trillion), is projected to have modest population and working-age population growth over the next 20 years. And its population will age more slowly than in other OECD countries. The US still has a positive replacement-level fertility rate, augmented by continued immigration, including an influx of highly educated immigrants at a rate above the OECD average, he said. Eberstadt sees immigration in the US and Canada as a “fantastically positive experience” for those countries.” (Quoted here.)

The American Enterprise Institute in July 2025:

Report: “Immigration Policy and Its Macroeconomic Effects in the Second Trump Administration”

This AEI report projects that U.S. net migration in 2025 will fall to between −525,000 and 115,000 and reduce GDP growth by 0.3–0.4 percentage points. Its model estimated that if low immigration persists, GDP in 2034 would be roughly 1–2 percent smaller than under normal migration levels. That is to say, the GDP in 2034 would be about 41 trillion with pre Trump prevailing immigration and about 40 trillion without.  Thus its model expects a modest adverse impact.