Ban of Muslims and Others Already U.S. Law: 8 U.S. Code 1182 –– Pundits, Politicians, Candidates Need to Get Over Themselves

Rush Limbaugh said it best.

RUSH: Here is number eight US Code 1182, inadmissible aliens.  This law was written in 1952.  It was passed by a Democrat-controlled Congress, House and Senate, and signed by a Democrat president.

“Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by president.  Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the

Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh

entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

Over here, everybody in the establishment in the political class, Republican, Democrat, media, you name it, is all claiming that what Trump said is dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous, unconstitutional, while it is the law of the land.  And it was utilized by Jimmy Carter, no less, in 1979 to keep Iranians out of the United States, but he actually did more.  He made all Iranian students already here check in, and then he deported a ton of ’em.

There is precedent for everything Donald Trump has said he wants to do.  And if you listen to the wizards of smart in this country and our political establishment, you will think that this stuff is just unheard of, it’s almost unspeakable, it’s just indecent.  Here we have in the establishment the reputed best and brightest, the smartest. We’re not even qualified to be in their company no less.  And they’re dunces on this.

In November the 1979 United States attorney general had given all Iranian students one month to report to the local immigration office.  Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas, 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the United States, 1979.  When this law, inadmissible aliens I just read to you, which I’m gonna be reading a lot to you today to the point you’re gonna get tired of hearing it, but you won’t forget it.

This law was passed in 1952.  Do you know what was going on in 1952, among other things?  There was no immigration in 1952.  It was shut down.  Immigration was shut down 1924 to 1965.  And why did we have this?  What was the need for this in 1952?  Oh, yeah, we had rampant illegal immigration. I’m talking about we suspended legal immigration from 1924 to 1965, but we were being overrun in 1952 like we always are.  We’re the last great hope of the world.  That law was written to allow the president to keep undesirables out and to kick undesirables out.  There’s no mystery.

I’ve got to remind you of something here, folks.  The Jimmy Carter stuff that I just told you about, all of these statements that Jimmy Carter made were made in public, and the announcements that he made that he was gonna send Iranians home, Iranian students home, that they had to report to immigration, they had to confirm they were here legally, those who weren’t were sent back. They put a moratorium on all Iranians being allowed in the country back in 1979.

Carter did that publicly.  He announced it in public, and he announced it proudly. . . .

So here again, number 8 United States Code, inadmissible aliens.  “Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by president.  Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may, by proclamation,” meaning he doesn’t have to go back and get a new vote.  This law empowers him to stand up and do what Jimmy Carter did.  “He may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary –” until next week, until next year, until whenever he wants “– suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.  Read more at Rush Limbaugh (but I have to give you more. . . .

The very first US immigration law was the Chinese Exclusionary Act of 1882.  Then there was the Anarchist Exclusion Act of 1903, which we have discussed on this program.  But this has reminded me of something.  A couple of weeks ago Obama went on TV, as he is wont to do, and said (imitating Obama), “We do not have a religious test for people entering our country.  It doesn’t matter what they believe.  We have freedom of religion in this country, whatever amendments since then.  And it’s the law, it’s our law, and we cannot ask people about their religion, and we certainly cannot use what they say as a reason to keep –”  And I was forced to remind everybody that not only can we, we must, because it is also American statutory law.  We must ask immigrants seeking asylum what their religious beliefs are.  We have done it.  We continue to do it.  Here’s why. 

The primary reason most refugees give for seeking asylum is that they are fleeing religious persecution in whatever war torn place they’re coming from.  During the interview process, it is required that we investigate that.  “What religion are you?” we ask.  They must tell us.  Based on what they tell us, we then examine whether or not there is indeed persecution of that religious belief in the place where the immigrant, the refugee, is coming from.  We dealt with this a couple of weeks ago.  Obama said you could never have a religious test for refugees, and we showed that a religious test is actually written into the statutes that govern refugees and asylum. 

How many Muslim “refugees” coming here to kill us (and we know some are) will convince U.S. authorities they are being persecuted under Muslim law? The answer is every single one of them.

You’ve heard the current comparisons of Trump to Adolph Hitler?

David Harsanyi of The Federalist, who lost family members during the Holocaust, and speaks with authority when he replies to Scarborough, “No. Not at all.”

David says he tries to be a good sport about “the occasional gratuitous Nazi analogy,” but feels obliged to throw a flag on this particular play (read his direct quote here.) . . .

He offers an interesting theory that the swift flurry of “Trump=Hitler” responses might be due to the Left’s effort to portray Muslims as an oppressed class in the Western world. There’s a lively genre of European editorials and political speeches that explicitly claim “Muslim refugees are the new Jews.”

Then from the National Review:

As for whether Trump’s proposed Muslim immigration ban would be unconstitutional, Mark Krikorian at National Review judges it would most likely pass Constitutional muster, with due allowances for varying interpretations . . . More on that reasoning here.

Well, exactly. Read more on Senator Lindsey Graham telling Donald Trump to “go to hell,” and naming him “ISIL Man of the Year.

Anwar Awlaki: If this chaps you as much as it does me, we are both chapped to the bone: Remember al-Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki, New Mexico-born imam who also held dual citizenship with Yemen –– big shot in the jihad –– the “bin Laden of the Internet,” hosted three 9/11 hijackers at his radical mosque in Falls Church, Virginia, asked to lead prayer at the Pentagon shortly after 9/11/01, and the man Fort Hood murderer Nidal Hasan followed through attending the mosque (had his mother’s funeral there), and emailed with –– left the U.S. when things began to get hot –– when his association with the “Christmas Day Underwear Bomber,” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab became public. We did not revoke his U.S. citizenship, or the U.S. citizenship of his American-born son. The U.S. targeted Awlaki Sr. with a drone and got him. They also got the sixteen-year-old son, who is said to not have “terror” ties. Yeah, well . . . . It is illegal to target a natural-born U.S. citizen for death, but we we can revoke citizenship, even natural born under certain circumstances. Had we done so, the targeting would have been legal.

Anyone questioning U.S. ability to control who comes to this country isn’t thinking. What kind of country has not a single law to control their borders and keep their citizens safe? Not the U.S. We don’t use laws, but we have them. A lot of pundits and politicians need to get over themselves. Cry and Howl asks why U.S. laws are ignored, and he has an answer. Read it here.

Linked at BadBlue – the baddest, uncensored news on the net, 24/7. Read it here.

Linked at Doug Ross and Larwyn’s Links in the After Jihadist Mass Murder, CAIR’s Sharia Agenda Rolls On Edition. Read it here. This daily list of articles is one of the best ways to stay informed.

If you have time, please vote in the presidential poll top right side.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • marlene

    And we’ve got 5 ineligible members of congress, 2 from Cuba, running for president. Will we ever learn?

    • That issue won’t get taken care of until SCOTUS cleans up past history.

      • marlene

        True. We need the right president to appoint the right justices to the bench.

        • We sure won’t get them with another Democrat in office. Honestly, it goes back so far that I don’t think we will see denying a U.S. mother passing on her citizenship, because the arguments of the original intent, and SCOTUS decisions have been so muddied. I believe a good start is no dual citizenship. Choose and be that would help.

          • marlene

            Thank you. This scares me. I hope our future presidents speak English.

  • AndRebecca

    Rush is almost always right, but he is confusing me on this. Between 1924 and 1965 we had immigration to this country. And, we have changed immigration laws over the years, even after 1952. Before 1882, only people from certain European countries came here, with a few exceptions. An interesting group of immigrants came here due to the Armenian Genocide. Between 1914/15 to 1918+ the Turks were killing off any Christians they could get their hands on in Armenia. We managed to save some of them… It has been only recently that we’ve taken Muslims on any scale.

    • AndRebecca, I’m working on a post about this. The simple answer for today is that Obama has amped up Muslims coming to this country, as never before. I believe it’s an agenda and I believe Democrats see voters. More when I get it put together.

  • John J Holliday

    Good one

  • Yet it amaezes me and makes you wonder why Democrats and the Republicans are up at arms over Donald J. Trump wanting to ban Muslims from America. When even President Jimmy Carter did it in the 1970’s and banded them and he was a Democrats. Makes you wonder, who really forgot their History lesson in this country. It seems like this country has selective memory when it comes to history of America and history of american politics.Their is a law on the books that allows the US to ban any immigrant from this country and that is 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens. It seems like Liberals, pundits and politicians forgot that part of the history and US law

    • Nicky, both sides of the aisle forgets history when they think it creates votes. Republicans are terrified they will offend. The law makes it clear, and it is incomprehensible that we can’t stop any one who may bring lethal agendas to this country. Of course, we can. Many though, simply see votes. Many thanks for stopping by.

      • It’s why people seem to forget which party voted for that law

      • bg9g1


        i respectfully disagree..

        re: [Republicans are terrified they will offend]

        perhaps they used to be afraid, but not any more, they’ve (the careerist who throw us a bone to keep us in tone now and then) finely honed and evolved a good cop bad cop way of playing US like a Stradivarius while they benefit all day.. imho that is..

        • bg9g1, I was referring to the establishment, not the “voters,” or majority of voters. The establishment and the press pressure with fears that we will turn off moderate voters. I agree with you.

          • bg9g1

            hi.. 🙂

            i was also referring to the establishment..

            they have been working hand in hand with Obama & the Dems.. all you have to do is realize who’s done what for whom and what in both domestic and foreign matters.. no establishment politician, that’s for sure.. and albeit i like him, not even Cruz, as the two bills he spoke out against, he voted for, i call bs on the better of two evils excuse, like his vote would have made a dent against them passing.. in my opinion, it’s a matter of principle, he obviously can’t stand on his, besides, i believe he’s as eligible as Obama to be president according to the constitution, not what they have been telling US the constitution states, as i have witnessed the wording being changed at least 3 times in recent history, actually, Obama history, so make that the last several years.. i io however, wish he could be VP anyway, but alas , he doesn’t qualify for that either.. but either way, it wouldn’t make a difference as Caliph in Chief Obama has taken over the judicial branch as well as, even though controlled by Republicans, Congress.. Obama et al must have some pretty heavy blackmail materiel is all i have to say..

  • bg9g1

    12/11/15

    Sen Sessions delivers magnificent rebuttal
    to ‘right-to-migrate’; ‘Amen times 10,000’
    http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/12/11/sen-sessions-delivers-magnificent-rebuttal-to-right-to-migrate-amen-times-10000-283186?hvid=5B32yn#ixzz3u25VvXfi

    yep, it’s the law.. 🙂