Capstone Final Submission "Fall of Rome" by Mary Kathryn Cook

5/12/2017

Capstone

Mary Kathryn Cook

ST. EDWARDS UNIVERSITY

Table of Contents Submission 5: “Fall of Rome”

Submission 4: Civic Engagement 11 Submission 3: Presentation of the Arguments Submission 2: Presentation of Research Submission 1: Outline

Submission 5: “Fall of Rome” Airports are very liminal spaces. The Abba’s...or maybe it’s the Sanchez’? Or the Garza’s? Honestly, at this point I’ve done this trip so many times that ethnic faces pass in front of my eyes in a blur. Anyways, let’s assume this is the Abba’s and they are welcomed by me in and the giant banner that says “Home of the Breakfast Taco”. The breakfast taco is a new concept for them. The little girl has her hair braided just like her mom’s, she must have spent hours on the plane trying to get it right when being in cramped seats, the little boy is hiding behind his mom but his eyes are darting around taking in all the different people. As we wait for the bags at the baggage claim there is a statue of Barbara Jordan and her words “E pluribus unum”1 hang in the air. Or maybe it’s the ringing in my own ears. I see the Abba boy pointing his finger at the statue and giggling with his sister. ‘I think she looks a little weird too’ I say. His face drops any expression and he looks at me blankly. It’s okay I’m used to it at this point It’s about 7pm when I pick them up. The air lingers with the heat from the day. These drives are always a little awkward. I can’t answer a lot of questions about where they will go because I simply don’t know where they’ll go. I take them to the apartment the Refugee Center of Texas has set up for them then I’ll leave them to their new life. I am liminal to them too. “IT IS THE FALL OF ROME!” The voice of Liz Gheiss founder of StoptheMagnet is so loud through my telephone that I have to hold it away from my ear. StoptheMagnet is an organization that describes itself on its website as a political action committee dedicated to preserving our community through adherence to the Rule of Law2. “What do you mean by that?” I ask. I’m a theology major so my knowledge of the fall of Rome is limited to St. Augustine’s On the City of God written in 430 AD as the Vandals are sacking the 1 “In Unity We Are One’. Barbara Jordan was one of the first African American women to serve in the Texas Senate and the first African American woman elected to U.S. Congress from the south. “Barbara Jordan’, Austin-Bergstrom International Airport Website. 2017. 2 The rule of law is a legal principle that law should govern a nation as opposed to a individuals. Introduced in the Federalist Papers. Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, “Overview-Rule of Law”, United States Courts. Web. 2017

city reassuring his followers that even though the earthly city was being destroyed there is a perfect city in heaven. Leaving me to wonder how this metaphor worked. Gheiss continued forward with gusto, “This has happened in our society before. You can look back at the fall of Rome and see what will happen to us!” She keeps saying that “It’s the fall of Rome!” and I wondered what she was talking about. To answer this I approach Father Louis Brusatti, professor at St. Edward’s University, after our class about religious study methods. As a St. Vincent de Paul Catholic priest he has a depth of knowledge on Roman history. His face is filled with amusement when I explain the situation to him. “Actually” he said, “the revival of the ‘fall of Rome’ originates from a Steve Bannon video from a few years back. It’s this apocryphal vision of how Western culture is going to fall.” I’m not the least bit surprised at this new knowledge as Steve Bannon is well known for his apocryphal rhetoric. Fr. Brussati continues, “Some people accredit the fall of Rome to certain values they acquired after they stopped expanding. Mainly it was tolerance of other cultures and not persecuting them. However, certain historians would claim they had become soft and complacent” “So, who conquered Rome, then?” I ask Fr Louis sighs and looks up trying to recall their exact names, “Well the Romans called them barbarians. I think it is mostly accredited with the Vandals.” He continues, “Most interestingly is when Rome went in and conquered different communities they would build up a militia and teach the people there how to fight with Roman weapons and knowledge. So, the Vandals conquered Rome because Rome has given them the ammunition they needed.” That certainly sounded familiar. It was easy from there to draw the same lines that Gheiss did and see how United States funding wars in the Middle East under President Reagan3. And how there is now a lot of hostility by those Middle Eastern countries towards the United States. Today, in United States situation, who are the barbarians in the metaphor that Gheiss is talking about? It’s easy to take Islam as her answer as it comes up frequently in our conversation. The barbarians she is talking about are the rush of refugees coming from Syria and several other Muslim majority countries in the Middle East. Unfortunately, with the number of refugees coming into countries there have also been several people working with terrorist organizations who have also come into a country and committed terrorist acts against that country. One of the 3 Reagan has been accused of trading weapons for hostages. “The Iran-Contra Affari”, Public Broadcasting Services. Web. 2016

most notorious happening in France4. This has caused a social problem in the United States between people who wish to be safe from potential foreign-born terrorists entering the United States and people who feel we have a humanitarian duty to the refugees. Gheiss continues, “We can see in the Atlantic 1.2 million Islams that are coming from the Middle East into Europe. It’s going to change Western Civilization and you can see Western culture being wiped out and replaced with Islam.” Now, the number that Gheiss gives is not quite accurate. According to the UNHCR there are about 21.3 million refugees in the world5 The main bulk of which are coming from Somalia, Afghanistan, and Syria which are Muslim dominated countries as Gheiss mentioned. While the amount of refugees the United States has taken in each year has fluctuated with various factors such as the political environment, world events, and societal attitude towards refugees, the number of refugees accepted into the U.S. per year has been climbing since 2004. The highest amount with President Obama in 2016 admitting the most at 84,000 refugees from the Middle East. Out of those 84,000 refugees only 2,000 of them were Syrian refugees. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugee Agency there are 5 million Syrian refugees and the United States has been asked to take in 23,000 Syrian refugees but has concluded that 21,000 humans of those were potential threats. The Abba family are from the Middle East, I don’t ask from which country because frankly I’m nervous about making them uncomfortable around me. However, the father tells me his uncle is located around Austin and they’ll visit him often.

“Can you tell me about your understanding of the Executive Order6?” I pause because no one really knows the real name of the Executive Order, “Or more commonly known as the “Trump Travel Ban.” Gheiss says “I know he was targeting the threats of terror from the stream of refugees. Attempting to ensure that the security was high enough that we could ensure that we caught someone associated with the terrorist groups. He did not choose all the Islamic countries. Though some liberal judge stopped it.” Gheiss shows a great trust in President Trump but does not have much trust in the federal government in its entirety. This seems to be a common theme amongst many conservative Americans. 4 In 2015 France was attacked by a terrorist who entered the country under the guise of being a refugee. CNN Journalist, “2015 Paris Terror Attacks ast Facts”, CNN. Web. 2015. 5 UNCHR is the UN Refugee Agency. 6 For the purposes of this Capstone paper I will only be focusing on the refugee side of the executive order.

She continued, “It was legitimate and much needed. We should have included more countries on the ban.” The Executive Order was signed by President Donald Trump on January 27, 2017. The stated purpose of this executive order is to protect citizens of the United States from foreign-born terrorist threats. Specifically, the executive order states “the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles.” To achieve these goals, the executive order includes banning immigration from the following countries: The countries which have been banned for ninety-days: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The executive order also temporarily suspends the issuance of Visas, suspends to Refugee Admissions Program for one-hundred and twenty days, and give priority to refugees with religions “which are the minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.”7 Two of the groups on this list are creating the most refugees on the world: Somalia and Syria. Which leads us to wonder why Afghanistan was not also on the list of countries band.

While Gheiss and StoptheMagnet are working toward the removal of refugee from the country, there is another group that supports refugee reform and opposes the Executive Order. Jennifer Alman is the Executive Director of the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops which is the lobbyist group for the Texas Catholic Bishops. We are sitting in her office early 8am in the morning on a Friday. She’s eating blueberry yogurt and I have ice coffee melting on her desk. “The Bishops are strongly against the Travel Ban.” Alman continues “There is a faith and pastoral reason to it, because clearly we are about Jesus as a refugee and welcoming the stranger, but it is also a practical reason.” as Alman is talking a Cardinal DiNardo bobble-head is sitting on her desk nodding along to her voice. I’m surprised, as I am a theology major and I thought I had this interview pegged out from the beginning. “This travel ban was put in under the guise of needing stronger vetting procedures, but we already have a strong vetting procedures. There are very low records of refugees committing crimes, and usually refugees are the most self-sufficient people because they are trying to build a life here. Refugees come here after living 2-3 years in a camp and going through a screening process and they are expected in 6 months to be completely self-sufficient.”

7 Trump, Donald, “EXECUTIVE ORDER: PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES”. The White House. Web. 2017

Alman is correct in saying there is a very low number of refugees committing crimes. The Cato institute reporting the chance of an American being killed in a terrorist attack committed by a refugee was 1 in 3.64 billion a year. 8 Then when Alman talks about the U.S. having strong vetting procedures she means that there are already a great number of things which disqualifies a refugee from being admitted into the United States. Things such as: criminal background, health issues, and security-related grounds could eliminate an entire family. Then for Syrian refugees this is a more extensive background checks which include biometric and biographic tests. Essentially biometric and biographic tests mean that the administrator must look at their lineage and their life story before letting a refugee into the country. Things such as letters they have written, their social media accounts, if they have ever owned a gun all come into play for Syrian refugees. In passing I wondered if the United States was in Syrians position how many Texans would be disqualified for having a gun on their facebook page. I know I would be.

However, Gheiss doesn’t believe that the vetting procedures are strong enough. “So” I ask “If the refugees who are coming in are dangerous, do you have any suggestions on how to fix refugee services?” Gheiss gives a long sigh before answering, “We are not in favor of any refugee resettlement. There is so much fraud and corruption in it.” Gheiss continues “and it’s really a problem because the numbers are huge and America has no idea what is coming for them.” At this point I have completed all my research on how the refugee process works. I feel it is important to tell the give a brief introduction to the system. This program has two parts. Though some would argue there is a third. There are two programs a refugee must go through before they can enter the United States. The first is the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugee Agency and the second is the U.S. Refugee Admission Program, from here out designated as UNHCR and USRAP respectfully. These two programs work together in resettling refugees in the United States of America. The first part is this. Starting the process, refugees do not come straight to the United States when they are fleeing their home country. The UNHCR oversees “providing life-saving assistance” to the refugees.9 8 Alex, Nowrasteh, “Terrorism and Immigration: A Risk Analysis”, The Cato Institute. Web. 2016. 9 “About Us”, The United Nations Refugee Agency. Web. 2017.

The UNHCR then determines the “most vulnerable” of the refugees, “most vulnerable” being defined as: not being able to return home, cannot return to home country, and “not expected to be able to locally integrate in that country in the future”. This part of the process can take between 4 to 10 months to complete by itself. The second part is this. Once the refugees have been determined they must be sent to the United States. The refugee must then being the process of filling out an application and the initial interview with a United States Citizen and Immigration Officer. This vetting process by itself can take between 18 to 24 months. According to the U.S. law a refugee must have a well-founded fear of persecution based on one of the five following “protected grounds”: Religion, political opinion, race, nationality, membership in a particular social group.10 While it took 3 minute to type this and it took the reader 30 seconds to read it, it took a refugee 3-6 years to go through it. The young Abba boy who was playing with my backseat window must have been about sevenyears old. As his mom swats his hand away from the button I think he must have only been threeyears old when his parents started this process. I wonder what he is running from. His boogie monsters don’t live in the closet or under the stairs. They have faces and guns and loud screaming voices.

There’s brief silence on the other end of the phone and I think Gheis is thinking that she’s scared me off. While I wouldn’t describe myself as having been scared I would, I think, describe myself as having been incredulous. Gheiss organization StopTheMagnet says to uphold Western Values but this seems a direct contradiction against the words inscribed on Lady Liberty. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.” - Lady Liberty “Yeah, thank you for being so honest” I say into the speaker. Validated. She continues, “And you know what? The Universities are going to fall first!” As she knows I am a University student I’m slightly stunned at her language. Well what was that about? 10 Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, “U.S. Refugee Admissions Program”, U.S. Department of State. Web. 2017

Fr. Louis Brusatti and I are walking around the St. Edward’s seal, as is tradition, he lets out a loud laugh when I ask him this question, “Oh well it’s probably because Universities teach tolerance, bring into contact many cultures, and teach an acceptance of those cultures.” Ah I see. “So Ms. Gheiss, people who are opposed to the Executive Order would say that the United States has a duty to our global community as a superpower on the world stage. How would you respond to that?” Gheiss answer is immediate, “I don’t buy into that humanitarian bullshit.” I blink hard. I’m stunned because I wasn’t expecting that answer. To me it sounds close to egoism than upholding Western Values. I don’t have a lot of time to process as Gheiss keeps talking. “In fact, I think the US is actually in decline as a Superpower with being 19 trillion dollars in debt and we see Europe collapsing in decline under the weight of the all the refugees coming in from the Middle East.” I ask Alman a similar question “How would you answer people who say the United States has a duty to protect their citizens before the global community?” Alman is untroubled by the question, “We can do both. It’s not an ‘either/or’ situation. We need to help everyone we can.” Though Alman might not have noticed it with her casual answer, but she’s showing that she and the bishops subscribe to the ethics of care. Alrighty then. Then finally, I have one more question for Gheiss and Alman. “What are the consequences and benefits if this bill is passed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals?” Gheiss answers, “It would be some effort on the government's part so that is a benefit. The consequence is that it would not be remotely tight enough.” Alman answers, “There are absolutely no benefits to this bill. And I think it puts a chilling effect on people who want to help. It scapegoats refugees as terrorists and puts into the American psyche, hearts and minds, that this is a group I should be suspect of.” By this point in our interview Alman had used the phrase “chilling effect” a few times to explain the Executive Order. So, I searched for clarity on what that meant, “What do you mean by chilling effect?”

Alman leans back in her chair and clasps her hands together, “I’ll give you an example. The Baptists, who we work with, at the press conference on SB4 talked about how since Trump took office, announced sanctuary cities, and deportation of anyone here illegally, the pastor noticed that families stop coming to church together. They have either gone very underground, or families will split themselves up so both parents won’t get deported together in case they get pulled over or stopped.” Alman pauses to take a sip of her water sitting on the desk, “If both parents are deported the children would go to Foster care and you know all the horrible things about Foster care in Texas right now. So, parents do not want that to happen.” It’s hot outside when I walk out of my meeting with Alman. As the heat from the day causes my ears to ring, I’m acutely aware the Executive Order is putting stress and breaking communities as it attempts to keep another one safe.

There is a third part of the refugee services that I find is the most critical of all. It’s after the refugees have been deemed acceptable to come to the United States. This part includes a medical exam, a cultural orientation which helps those coming into the United States navigate the country, travel plans made, and a loan for the travel expenses to the United States. This loan is to be paid back within five years. Which the United States Department of State's says this helps the refugees develop credit. The Department of State’s decide where the refugees will enter refugee resettlement programs. These programs are community programs that work to teach the refugee cultural things, how to apply for a job, and how to navigate the city. These programs are picked based on closeness to family members and the type of people living in communities this will facilitate the refugee’s chances of success. The Department of State’s will help the refugee for ninety-days then Then the refugee once arriving in the United States must apply for a worker’s permit, and then a year later must apply for a green card, then they must wait five years to apply to become a citizen. This means it take 10 years for a refugee to become a citizen in the United States of America. “The refugee resettlement programs that are put in place is incredibly important. There’s a very strong desire to survive from the refugees coming over” Alman concluded. The Abba parents have tears in their eyes once we reach their new apartment. I help them get their keys and lead them to their apartment. The kids are tired. They walk into their new apartment which had been set up weeks earlier by other volunteers. I leave them to their new home. As I’m driving away down the highway, passing countless other cars full of stories, I think about how liminal the United States is right now.

We are lingering like the sun on the horizon. We are the silence that follows the “boom” when a tree falls. America, we are in a liminal too. The decision is like the person on the boat before the sea meets the sand This space is the waiting room at midnight with the fluorescent lights flickering and the sound of nurse’s shoes as they walk around. It is St. Andre, the porter, waiting at the door. We are in a liminal space. I would love to provide a conclusion to this capstone paper, but I am afraid there is not one. The United States is on the edge of a decision that will linger over the heads for generation of Americans. So instead of a conclusion I’ll offer a prayer from St. Francis of Assisi Lord, Make me and instrument of your piece. Where there is hatred, let me sow love. Where there is injury, pardon. Where there is doubt, faith. Where there is despair, hope. Where there is darkness, light. Where there is sadness, joy. O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled, as to console; to be understood, as to understand; to be loved, as to love. For it is in giving that we receive. It is in pardoning that we are pardoned, and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life. Amen.

Submission 4: Civic Engagement

Interview 1: Liz Gheiss Founder of Stop the Magnet Question 1: Have you heard of the Executive Order 13769 On Protection the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States? Can you tell me your position on the Executive Order?

Liz: I know he was targeting the threats of terror from the stream of refugees. Attempting to ensure that the security was high enough that we could ensure that we got someone associated with the terrorist groups. He did not choose all the Islamic countries. He rewrote the order and eliminate it with Iraq because he was working with them to get Isis out of the territory and he felt he could work with Iraq to bring the best people over here. It was legitimate and much needed. We should have included more countries. We are not in favor of any refugee resettlement. There is so much fraud and corruption in it. What we have right now are citizen journalist doing all the reporting and the news never reaches the average American. And itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s really a problem because the numbers are huge and America has no idea what is coming for them. We can see in the Atlantic 1.2 million that are coming from the Middle East into Europe and itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s going to change Western Civilization and you can see the culture being wipes out and replaced.

Me: Do you see any suggestions on how to fix it?

Liz: Well it really needs to be removed. What needs to be done is an expose on what is going on in refugee services so that we can get rid of it all together. The people who are coming here have no plan on simulating to our culture. They want to change it to make it more like their culture. And what comes over from the Middle East is sexism, supremacy of the man, and hostility to any western values.

Question 2: What would you say brought you to this position?

Question 3: What are the benefits/consequences you see of Executive Order 13769 being passed in the Supreme Court?

Liz: It would be some effort on the government's part so that is a benefit. The consequence is that it would not be remotely tight enough. There are still large numbers of Islamic groups coming in and making a maneuver on our political system with the dahlia (mental note to look that up later) What is going to happen is that Islam is coming in and eroding our society and the society will erode until it is noticed. And we have noticed at StoptheMagnet. None of that will change unless we get rid of the Islam politically. Culturally, and linguistically. This has happened in our society before. You can look back at the fall of Rome and see what will happen to us. “It’s the fall of Rome” the fall of universities because people in universities think that western society needs to go and they think that there needs to be a new area that comes in. And Islam doesn’t the appreciate freedom of speech and American culture. They will erode us and destroy us until we are just like the Middle East. We have given up on assimilation, they have given up, it’s a fight for our way of life.

This ban will not tackle what is happening every day what is happening in the US and what happens with supremacist way of thinking. The Muslim brotherhood is making a stance in the United States and they aren’t covered by the ban either. So, we really focus on the local stuff as opposed to federal government.

Question 4: Some of the people in opposition of the Executive Order say the United States has a duty to the global community. How would you respond to this?

Liz: I don’t buy into that humanitarian bullshit. I think the US is in decline as a Superpower with being 19 trillion dollars in debt and we see Europe collapsing in decline under the weight of the all the refugees coming in from the Middle East. And what is worse, any refugees who are coming over to us are because Europe picks them out for us! And that explains why we don’t get many Christians and why they are being persecuted in the Middle East. The terrorist groups only want to send Islam and Islam is what we are getting. So, I would say overall it is bullshit and propaganda that we are supposed to be humanitarian about refugees coming in. Media uses the humanitarian angle to get us let them in.

Question 5: How do you see this Executive Order affecting immigration? I think it is a good start, but of course there is so much more that needs to be done.

Question 6: Are you aware of aware of other people holding the same position as you who would be willing to speak to the issue? I do! I’ll give them your number and have them reach out to you

Interview 2 Jennifer Alman Executive Director of the Policy Makers for the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops

Question 1: Have you heard of the Executive Order 13769 On Protection the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States? Can you tell me your position on the Executive Order?

Jen: Well I know that the original travel ban was to ban seven countries and it was one of the first things that President Trump did. I know it affected our Catholic Charities, especially in Fort Worth who actually had families on the way when it was put in place. I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know if these families were resettled because they needed to go through the application process again. The Bishops are strongly against it.

Question 2: What would you say brought you (Bishops) to this position?

Jen: Well there is a faith and pastoral reason to it, because clearly, we are about Jesus as a refugee and welcoming the stranger, but it is also a practical reason. This travel ban was put in under the guise of needing stronger vetting procedures, but we already have a strong vetting procedures. There are very low records of refugees committing crimes, and usually refugees are the most self-sufficient people because they are trying to build a life here. Refugees come here after living 2-3 years in a camp and going through a screening process and they are expected in 6

months to be completely self-sufficient. So, the program that is put in place is incredibly important. Very strong desire to survive

Question 3: What are the benefits/ consequences you see of Executive Order 13769 being passed in the Supreme Court?

There is no benefit to this bill. And I think it puts a chilling effect on people who want to help. It scapegoats refugees as terrorists and puts into the American psyche, hearts and minds, that this is a group I should be suspect of.

Amarillo is an interesting place. It has the highest per capita ration of refugees. You put your refugees where jobs are and Amarillo has many jobs in meat packaging which refugees are employed. And there are 122 languages spoken in Amarillo. Amarillo mostly voted for Trump, but everyone recognize Refugees as an important part of their community.

Question 4: Some of the people in opposition of the Executive Order say the United States has a duty to the local community over the global community. How would you respond to this?

We can do both. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not an either or. We arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t harming our communities by helping refugees,

Question 5: How do you see this Executive Order affecting immigration as a whole?

We have definitely seen a reduction of immigrants come to the United States. I don’t know if it is explicitly linked to the Trump Travel ban or every other immigration law.

Me: so what do you mean by chilling effect?

Jen: I’ll give you an example. The Baptists, who we work with, at the press conference talked about how since Trump took office and announced sanctuary cities and deportation of anyone here illegally, he’s noticed that families stop coming to church together. They have either gone very underground, or families will split themselves up so both parents won’t get deported together in case they get pulled over or stopped. If both parents are deported the children would go to Foster care and you know all the horrible things about Foster care in Texas right now. So parents do not want that to happen.

Me: This really isn’t protecting the family unit.

Jen: Yes, a big part of our immigration policy is about protecting the family unit.

Question 6: Do you feel that faith-based refugee centers are important to refugee resettlement?

Jen: Yes. We have been experiencing a slow loss of our first amendment right to practice our faith and we do not have conscience protection for our facilities to help us live out our faith as we are called to do in the gospel of Matthew. And if we are being prohibited from serving our

faith than it hurts our communities. And we are not living out our call to help God if we can not help the stranger because no refugees are coming in.

Civic Engagement I did my civic engagement by working with the Refugee Services of Texas. I first attended an orientation with them where they explained how the whole arrangement worked, where the refugees were coming from, and a little about the travel ban. My main form of civic engagement has been driving arriving families from the airport to their new homes or to the Refugee Services of Texas office. This has been an eye opening experience. Usually, the families speak a little english and they recognize their name on the sign I make to pick them up. My car holds four people, not including me, so usually I pick up a mom and dad with one child or two.

Submission 3: Perspectives

Submission 2: Presentation of Research Should the US Supreme Court uphold the currently halted Executive Order Executive Order: Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States in order to protect US Citizens from foreign terrorists entering the country as refugees? On January 27th, 2017, the 45th President of The United States Donald J Trump announced he signed Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States. The stated purpose of this executive order is to protect citizens of the United States from foreign-born terrorist threats. Specifically, the executive order states “the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles.” Additionally, this executive order purpose is to make sure that “no one entering the United States “do not engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including "honor" killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation” (Exec. Order No. 13769). To achieve these goals, the executive order includes banning immigration from the following countries: The countries which have been banned for ninety-days: Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and an indefinite ban on Syria. The executive order also temporarily suspends the issuance of Visas, suspends to Refugee Admissions Program for one-hundred and twenty days, gives states more authority over where refugees are settled, and give priority to refugees with religions “which are the minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality” into the refugee programs (Exec. Order No. 13769). As I have established, the major social issue President Trump is trying to solve with his executive order is the threat of foreign-born terrorists entering in the country with the admitted refugees. The opponents of the executive order say that there is a social issue of foreign-born terrorism entering the United States is solved through the current screening process on refugees

weeds our terrorist threats and implementing this ban which targets Muslim-majority countries will only increase racism, tensions, and hate crimes against the Muslim community. Some people would argue that The United States is playing into the hands of the terrorists by preventing Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. There are stakeholders on either side of this issues. President Donald Trump’s executive order was issued quickly, loudly, and was met with a lot of resistance. Supporters of the executive order say it is well within President Trump’s constitutional rights as head of the executive branch, that the executive order only targets “failed states”, and that there is a real threat of terrorists using the refugee system to get into the United States. On the other side, there are many people and organizations who have aligned themselves against the executive order because of it interferes with businesses, because it does not respect the dignity of human life, it targets Muslims and creates more racism against them, and it is unconstitutional. Understanding the stakeholder arguments is imperative to determine whether Should the US Supreme Court uphold the currently halted Executive Order Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States to protect US Citizens from foreign terrorists entering the country as refugees. To grasp some of these arguments, some background information is necessary, including basic familiarity with these concepts: refugee, green card, and refugee resettlement programs A refugee is a person who is fleeing their homeland to escape persecution, war, or natural disaster. A green card holder is a foreign national who has been given permission to work and live in the United States permanently. A refugee resettlement program is a program set up by the federal government in conjunction with a nonprofit to “transfer of refugees from an asylum

country to another State that has agreed to admit them and ultimately grant them permanent settlementâ&#x20AC;? (UNHCR). For reason of space and relevance, this paper will only examine the refugee process to the United States, more specifically, the refugees coming from the Middle East. This paper will not look at refugees entering from Latin America. It will not focus on people who come to the United States with a student visas or work visas or even those with dual citizenship. While, these are serious and worthy issues and the Executive Order: Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States affects those programs, this paper is limited by time and space. Providing history and background to the issues and arguments discussed in-depth later in this paper is crucial to understanding them. It is important to understand the history behind this executive order and why it has originated now in 2017. First letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s talk about the situation with the executive order. So, on January 27, 2017 President Donald J Trump signed the Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States. Then on February 3, 2017 Judge James Robert of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington put a temporary suspension on the executive order. Then once the decision has been made by the Ninth Appeals Court, which is one step lower than the Supreme Court, then the Trump administration can either sue for a hearing at the Supreme Court or they can make a new draft and try again with the Executive Order. Secondly, let's understand why this executive order has come to fruition now in 2017. This executive order came about to answer the social problem of potential foreign-born terrorists entering the United States and committing a terrorist act against the United States. There has been an increase of refugees since 2011 and, in places such as France and Jordan, foreign-born terrorists have snuck into a country with the refugees and committed a terrorist act against the

hosting country. This is obviously very frightening for Americans when 9/11 still lingers prominent in the memories of Americans. The United States wants to prevent foreign-born terrorists coming into the country by suspending and reviewing programs such as: Visa programs, green cards, and refugee resettlement programs. So, what has changed from 2001 and 2011 to now in 2017? The fluctuation of refugees and immigration has always fluctuated with global events and American’s moods towards the refugees. Before 2001 the average number of refugees was between 110,000 and 112,000, but after 9/11, under the orders of President George W Bush, those numbers dropped drastically to only 27,000 a year. The numbers of refugees accepted into the United States has been steadily climbing since 2004 with President Obama in 2016 admitting the most at refugees about 84,000 refugees from the Middle East (RPC). Since 2011 there has been a rush of refugees from the Middle East, specifically from Syria, into western Europe and the United States. Approximately, there are 4.8 million Syrian refugees world-wide (UNHCR website). The United States, before the executive order, had accepted about thirteen-thousands of those refugees. Then this gets us into the question of: how do the refugees gain admittance to the United States in the first place? This question will help us follow the Executive Order “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” and the arguments on either side of the policy. There are two main programs that we must look at for the refugee resettlement program: The first is the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugee Agency and the second is the U.S. Refugee Admission Program (from here out designated as the USRAP). These two programs work together in resettling refugees in the United States of America.

The First the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (from here out designated as UNHCR) was established in 1951 and was “started with 51 people” and was established during the aftermath of the Second World War (The United Nations Refugee Agency). The United States of America was one of the first countries to sign the agreement with UNHCR to be a host countries for refugees. Today, the UNHCR “has more than 10,700 staff workers, works with 128 countries, and the budget is 6.54 in 2016” (The United Nations Refugee Agency). The second program is called the U.S. Refugee Admission Program which spearheads the refugee admission process. It was first established in the 1980’s and is endorsed by the executive office. According to the U.S. Department of State the USRAP. Each year the President of the United States, in this case Donald J. Trump, works with Congress to determine the processing priorities and designated nationalities for the upcoming year. The USRAP is comprised of many nonprofit organizations and four main federal agencies: The Department of Homeland Security, the Bureau of Population, The Department of State, and the Office of Refugee resettlement. The U.S. Department of State boasts being the “largest resettlement country in the world admitting two-thirds of all refugee resettlement referrals worldwide each year” (The United States Department of State). Starting the process, refugees do not come straight to the United States when they are fleeing their home country. The UNHCR is in charge of “providing life-saving assistance” to the refugees (The United Nations Refugee Agency). The UNHCR then determines the “most vulnerable” of the refugees, “most vulnerable” being defined as: not being able to return home, cannot return to home country, and “not expected to be able to locally integrate in that country in the future”. Then it goes further to say there are refugees who are extremely vulnerable and these can be “female-headed households, victims of torture or violence, religious minorities, LGBT

refugees, or people who need medical care that they cannot receive in their country of origin or the country of first asylum”. This part of the process can take between 4 to 10 months to complete by itself. According to the UNHCR have referred 23,000 Syrian refugees in 2015 and the United States had accepted 2,000 of those Syrian refugees. In 2017, the UNHCR says there are about 478,000 Syrian refugees who are considered extremely vulnerable and are waiting for a host country. This is approximately half of the total of Syrian refugees. The second part is once the refugees have been determined they must be sent to the United States. The refugee must then be the process of filling out an application and the initial interview with a United States Citizen and Immigration Officer. This vetting process by itself can take between 18 to 24 months. Then the Department of Homeland Security has more criteria for the extremely vulnerable refugees who are seeking shelter. According to the U.S. law a refugee must have a well-founded fear of persecution based on one of the five following “protected grounds”: Religion, political opinion, race, nationality, membership in a particular social group (The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services). There are a great number of things which could disqualify a refugee from being admitted to the United States things such as: criminal background, health issues, and security-related grounds. For Syrian refugees this is a more extensive background checks, including biometric and biographic, more than other refugee background checks (The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services). The third part happens after a refugee has been deemed eligible to come into the United States. This part includes a medical exam, a cultural orientation which helps those coming into the United States navigate the country, travel plans made, and a loan for the travel expenses to the United States. This loan is paid back within five years. The United States Department of State's says this helps the refugees develop credit. The Department of State’s decide where the

refugees will enter refugee resettlement programs. These programs are picked based on closeness to family members and the type of people living in communities this will facilitate the refugee’s chances of success. The Department of State’s will help the refugee for ninety-days then Then the refugee once arriving in the United States must apply for a worker’s permit, and then a year later must apply for a green card, then they can apply for citizenship after they must wait five years. To come to a total, the refugee process can last upwards to ten years from refugee to citizen of the United States of America. Now that this paper has covered the history of the issues and the system of refugee admissions, it will go into more details about the issues and arguments by first outlining the stakeholders supporting the Executive Order: Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry. These groups are going to include: Freedom Watch, The American Conservative, American Family Association. These supporters of the executive order say it is well within President Trump’s constitutional rights as head of the executive branch, that the executive order only targets “failed states”, and that there is a real threat of terrorists using the refugee system to get into the United States. Specifically, the Freedom Watch has filed a counter suit against the Ninth Court of Appeals asking for them to lift the halt on the ban. Freedom Watch, Inc, is a public interest group that describes themselves as “remaining constant to the principles of the Founding Fathers, Freedom Watch is dedicated to ensuring the rights of all citizens through action, frequently with legal cases and other means.” Specifically, they argue most the country’s citizens are demanding the enforcing of immigration laws and the protection of the country’s borders. The American Conservative is published by the American Ideas Institute describes themselves as the “nonpartisan, non-profit group” and the President is Jeremey Beer (The

American Conservative). The author of their statement is Patrick Buchanan, who was a senior advisor to three presidents, condones this ban as being a temporary and legal ban that is well within the rights for the Executive branch to put into effect. Additionally, they argue that this ban was not a “Muslim ban”, as many people were calling it, because it did not include any of “the six largest Muslim countries” (Buchanan). The ban was comprised of “three U.S.-designated state sponsors of terror, and the other four are war zones” (Buchanan). The argument here is that there is no basis of religious discrimination. Then the American Family Association describes themselves as a “non-profit organization” founded by Donald E Wildmon in 1977. Their mission is to “inform, equip, and activate individuals to strengthen the moral foundations of American culture, and give aid to the church here and abroad in its task of fulfilling the Great Commission” (AFA). They also believe the executive order is biblical, legal, and constitutional. The article insists that God “forbade the nation of Israel to accept any immigrants” that manifest “unremitting hostility to another nation” in Deuteronomy 23:3 (Fischer). There are also opponents to the Executive Order: There are many stakeholders in this case there is a list of ninety-seven businesses who do not want Executive Order 13769 to be put into effect. This list includes, but is not limited to, Apple Inc, Intel, Microsoft, and Netflix to name a few. Specifically, they object to the interference with economic grown and American innovation, interference of competitiveness of U.S. Companies, the discrimination of their workers, and they seemingly arbitrary discretion. Though, there are people who do not support this Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States for the opponents they believe the executive order does more harm than good. They argue this bill interferes with business practices, targets

Muslims, creates tensions in our communities, and is unconstitutional. Some of these opponents are: Technology Businesses, The United States Conference of Bishops, and The American Civil Liberties. There are ninety-seven businesses who worked together to sign a court document titled “Brief of Technology Companies and Other Business as Amici Curiae in support of Appellees” and submit it to the Ninth Appeals Court saying they do not want the Executive Order “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” to be put into effect and it is hurting their businesses. This list of businesses includes, but is not limited to: Apple Inc, Intel, Microsoft, Netflix, and Google Inc. The ninety-seven business says this is directly interfering with their American innovation and economic growth which ultimately hurts the competitiveness of the United States companies against other businesses around the world. Additionally, they insist it is unlawful because it discriminates on “the basis of nationality” and it “exercises discretion arbitrarily” (13, 16 on Court Document. I can’t figure out how to cite this) Additionally, there is the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops do not want the executive order to go through based on moral values. The Catholic Church believes in the dignity of all human lives and believes refusing to accept refugees would harming them. Furthermore, they have many refugee resettlement programs through their religious orders like Jesuits and Holy Cross. They are based on their value statement they value the dignity of every human. Most Reverend Joe Vasquez, Bishop of Austin, Texas, and Chair of the Committee on Migration issued a statement “We believe that now more than ever, welcoming newcomers and refugees is an act of love and hope” (Vasquez). Even more so, they believe that picking refugees of a “religious minority” and that we need to protect “all brothers and sisters” (Vasquez).

Ten former national security officials came together and filed an appeal against the executive order and are standing together in protest of the executive order that it does not do its “declared task of protecting the nation from foreign terrorist entry into the United States”. Additionally, they offer their knowledge on national security and state that “this order cannot be justified on national security or foreign policy grounds.” The American Civil Liberties Union also opposed the bill under the idea that the bill will encourage hate crimes and the bill “targets Muslims” (ACLU website). They are a group dedicated to protecting the civil liberties of American Citizens and defenders of the United States Constitution. Because of these and other arguments in opposition of the Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States, the Ninth Court of Appeals has currently upheld the decision to halt the ban. The executive order will not be able to move up to the Supreme Court until later this week. These groups have their hands in legal departments. Two groups on the proponent side Freedom Watch and The American Ideas Institute have lobbyist groups to help promote their ideas. The Two groups on the opponent's side: The Catholic Conference of Bishops and the American Civil Liberties Unions have lobbyist groups in public offices. The two groups the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops will continue to fund their refugee resettlement program and fight local laws that are unjust the refugees. The ACLU also is fighting legal battles that have accumulated because of the executive order. I am not sure what the other groups, the technology businesses and the ten former national security officers are going to do. Work Cited Vasquez, Bishop Joe. "USCCB Committee on Migration Chair Strongly Opposes Executive

Order Because It Harms Vulnerable Refugee and Immigrant Families." USCCB. The United State Conference of Bishops, 27 Jan. 2017. Web. 28 Feb. 2017. Buchanan, Patrick J. "The Travel Ban Firestorm." The American Conservative. American Ideas Institute, 01 Jan. 2017. Web. 12 Feb. 2017. Exec. Order No. 13769, 3 C.F.R. (2017). Print. Fischer, Bryan. "Trump's Directive: Biblical, Constitutional, and Legal." American Family Association: The Stand. American Family Association, 30 Jan. 2017. Web. 12 Feb. 2017. State of Washington; State of Minnesota, vs. Donald J Trump, President of the United States. 1-29. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 2017. CNN. 2017. Web. www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politics/travel-ban-9th-circuit-ruling-full-text/index.html State of Washington vs. Donald J Trump, President of the United States. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington ON APPEAL 1-40. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 2017. Freedom Watch. 2017. Web. www.freedomwatchusa.org/pdf/170206-Final%20Amicus%20Brief%20EO.pdf Keane, Judy. "U.S. Bishops' Chair on Migration Responds to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision." United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 10 Feb. 2017. Web. 12 Feb. 2017. State of Washington vs. Donald J Trump, President of the United States. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington ON APPEAL 1-40. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 2017. Freedom Watch. 2017. Web.

http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/pdf/170206-Final%20Amicus%20Brief%20EO.pdf The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. The U.S. Department of Citizenship and Immigration Services. 2016. www.uscis.gov/. Accessed 27 Feb. 2017. The United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR). The UN General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. 2016. http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/. Accessed 27 Feb. 2017 The United States Department of State. The U.S Department of State. 2017. www.state.gov/. Accessed 27 Feb. 2017

‘

Submission 1: “Foundations of Research” I.

Topic Question: Should Trumps travel ban be repealed and focus be put on refugee services?

1. It is impossible to have refugee services if the United States is not allowing refugees to come into the country. So, these policies seem different on paper but they are explicitly linked together because the United States needs to have a plan for these refugees from start to finish; from entry to flourishing. I.

Underlying Social Problem: Do we have enough resources to support the refugees? Will the refugees be able to meld with American society? What do we do about the fear of terrorism of refugees/immigrants from certain countries come over?

II.

Presentation of the Cases A. Exec. Order No. 13769, 3 C.F.R. (2017). Print. 1. What is the Source: Policy-Executive Order 2. Who Wrote It: Trump Administration, more Specifically Stephen Miller 3. Why You Should Listen: The Trump Administration is the one who enacted the Executive Order. 4. What is the Thesis: This is the executive order entitled: EXECUTIVE ORDER: PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES. This was signed on January 27, 2017 by Donald J Trump the President of the United States. This is the policy that I am looking at for my paper. It is against this text that will be analyzed and will determine all of my proponents and opponents.

State of Washington; State of Minnesota, vs. Donald J Trump, President of the United States. 1-29. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 2017. CNN. 2017. Web.http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politics/travel-ban-9th-circuit-ruling-fulltext/index.html 1. What is the Source: Opponent- United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2. Who is the Source: CNN is my source because I found it there. 3. Who wrote it: The Ninth Circuit. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m not sure exactly who wrote it, but there are these names listed on the form: William C Canby, Richard Clifton, Michelle Friedland 4. Why you should listen: These are the people who have halted Trump's executive order. They are a fundamental part of the judicial branch of

power. They are the court just below the Supreme Court so they hold a great amount of authority in the federal system. 5. What is the Thesis: This is the Court Order from the Ninth Circuit which stopped Trump’s executive order. The Ninth Circuit Court is one step below the Supreme Court so if This is a text which highlights all of the legal reasons why the executive order is illegal. I will use this Court Order to understand the position of the Ninth Circuit. I.

Fischer, Bryan. "Trump's Directive: Biblical, Constitutional, and Legal." American FamilyAssociation: The Stand. American Family Association, 30 Jan. 2017. Web. 12 Feb. 2017. 1. What is this source? Proponent 1. Who wrote it? The American Family Association is a Non-profit and calls itself a “pro-family” organization. They have hundreds of thousands of supporters across the United States. This article is written from the perspective of a Bryan Fischer who is a middle-aged white man who appears to be educated in Bible literacy and law. 2. Why should I listen to the author/s? This is the people in the community who support Trump’s travel ban and have found justification for it. 3. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? This article has three main points: the liberals are acting irrationally, biblical justifications for the ban, and Trump’s legal authority in issuing the executive order. The article starts out by lashing out at the outrage that has come from the liberal left and the media. Fischer says it is irrational and unprecedented since Obama did the same thing during his presidency. Fischer goes on to give biblical justification. Specifically citing the book of Deuteronomy the Israelites were told to reject the immigrants coming in. He also mentions the biblical figure Ruth saying she was accepted into society once she turned away from her past religious affiliation. Then he says it is Trump’s legal right to do it as President of the United States. Fischer ends with “Trump’s directive is biblical, constitutional, legal, and designed to protect America’s security. There is

nothing here for American citizens and patriots to dislike and everything to approve.” II.

State of Washington vs. Donald J Trump, President of the United States. On Appeal from the

United States District Court for the Western District of Washington ON APPEAL

1-40. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 2017. Freedom Watch. 2017. Web. http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/pdf/170206-Final%20Amicus%20Brief%20EO.p 1. What is this source? Proponent 2. Who wrote it? Larry Klayman, Esq. 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? He’s the attorney of Freedom Watch. He also included a phone number and email so I’m not sure what to do with that Telephone: (561) 997-9956 Email: leklayman@gmail.com. Then Freedom Watch believes in the principles which were set forth by the founding fathers and say the biggest role models they have are John Adams, and more currently, Ronald Reagan. They support a democratic state and want to keep the United States from becoming a socialist country. Freedom Watch is a watchdog in politics and “will be at the forefront of preserving freedom for our children and grandchildren.” 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? This is an appeal for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to remove their ban on Trump’s executive order on halting immigration and travel. This was submitted by the Freedom Watch organization. They argue: It is well within the President’s power to monitor the country's borders, the executive order targets failed states, it’s a “straw man’s argument” about religious discrimination, irreparable harm supports it, and enjoining the executive order is mistaken, II.

Keane, Judy. "U.S. Bishops' Chair on Migration Responds to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision." United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 10 Feb. 2017. Web. 12 Feb. 2017. 1. What is this source? Opponent 2. Who wrote it? Judy Keane wrote it, but ultimately it comes from the bishops.

3. Why should I listen to the author/s? The Catholic Church is going to be one of the major characters in refugee services. Additionally, 25% of the United States are Catholics and they can be a big influence in policy change. 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops stands in opposition to Donald Trump’s Executive order halting immigration travel. Bishop Joe Vasquez is the Bishop of the Diocese of Austin and the Chairman of refugee and immigrant services in the United State Conference of Catholic Bishops. He is a Latino man and grew up in San Antonio. The Catholic Church feels that the immigration ban will create hostility and distance between the immigrant community and the law enforcement. The Catholic Church values the dignity of human life and believe these restrictions violate these values. They believe it puts many immigrants in danger of prejudice and racial tensions, leave the immigrants in unsafe environments, and violate their spiritual call to help the refugees. As a big religious organization that desires to help the immigrants and refugees it will be easy to track their opposition to this policy as it progresses II.

Buchanan, Patrick J. "The Travel Ban Firestorm." The American Conservative. American Ideas Institute, 01 Jan. 2017. Web. 12 Feb. 2017. 1. What is this source? Proponent 2. Who wrote it? Patrick Buchanan is a writer for The American Conservative which is published by the American Idea’s Institute. A “non partisan, non-profit” group. 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? On his website, Patrick Buchanan says he “has been a senior advisor to three Presidents, twice a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, and the nominee of the Reform Party in 2000”. 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source?

5. This source is helpful because it comes from an educated man who has been involved in politics for years. This article highlights a more moderate conservatism over the travel ban than the far right conservatives. They support his ban as a temporary and legal ban the Trump administration is allowed to do. I think the American Ideaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Institute is probably a lobby group in government because their website seems suspicious. II.

Jrsusa. "Barring Refugees Is an Affront to American Values." Jesuit Refugee Service. Jesuit Refugee Services, 26 Jan. 2017. Web. 12 Feb. 2017. 1. What is this source? Opponent 2. Who wrote it? The Jesuit Refugee Service has a group that is similar to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops but theirs is for the Jesuits and they speak on Jesuit issues. Their opinion is not different from the Catholic Church, but this will provide me another source in the Catholic Church and how they respond to the refugee and resettlement program. 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? Well the Jesuits are a group of the order of Jesus founded by St. Ignatius. They are committed to a life of poverty and service. Pope Francis is a Jesuit priest! 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? They object to the suspended of the entire U.S. refugee resettlement program for 120 days. The suspending indefinitely the admission of Syrian refugees. The object to reducing this yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s refugee arrivals from the anticipated 110,000 to 50,000. The object to the giving priority to religious minorities over others who may have equally compelling refugee claims. Lastly, they object to the suspension of the admission of immigrants and non-immigrants from countries including Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.

II.

Betts, Alexander (February 2016). Our refugee system is failing. Here's how we can fix it. https://www.ted.com/playlists/294/refugees_welcome 1. What is this source? Opponent-Video-More like information in creating refugee centers

2. Who wrote it? Alexander Betts 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? Alexander Betts is Leopold Muller Professor of Forced Migration and International Affairs and a Fellow of Green-Templeton College at the University of Oxford, 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? Ultimately, this source is going to help me lead into further submissions. While this source looks at the refugees coming to Europe, I think the solutions Betts comes up with apply to the larger Western world. Betts is looking at the refugee crisis that was happening in early 2016 and is offering different narratives to the refugees than the ones created by politicians. Betts says the refugees right now have three options: stay in a camp which restricts the lives of refugees, head to an urban center in a neighboring country, or take a dangerous journey to another country. He offers four ways to change this solution: give refugees economic opportunities and enabling environments, economic zones, ask refugees where they want to go with matching markets, and humanitarian visas. II.

Kerr, Christopher (January 2017).Understand the Executive Orders on Immigration and Refugees Ignatian Solidarity Network. https://www.facebook.com/pg/IgnatianSolidarity/videos/?ref=page_internal 1. What is this source? Background but also an Opponent. 2. Who wrote it? Christopher Kerr is the Executive Director of the Ignatian Solidarity Network. 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? So this is different than the Jesuits because the Ignatian Solidarity is more of a spiritual/faith movement than an action based society. It is too an action society, but a lot of Catholics follow the spirituality of the Ignatians and they will influence their followers. 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? This video was in response to the Trumpâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s executive order halting the immigration. It was shared over facebook live to be shared with their community, but also to the Christian community as a whole.

This video is an hour long and it answers what the executive orders are, what the orders are going to do, how they will be enacted, and how the Jesuit services are going to to respond to it. II.

Mary Turgi, Director of the Sisters of the Holy Cross (Notre Dame, IN) justice office 1. What is this source? Interview Source 2. Who wrote it? Not written yet. 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? Well Mary Tugri will be an interview source about how/why/in what ways we should help refugees. 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source?Possible This comes from their website “The Holy Cross International Justice Office, an inter-congregational project proposed by the Committee to Foster Union and endorsed by the leadership of the four Holy Cross Congregations, was officially launched in November 2000 with the first meeting of its Executive Committee at Saint Mary's, Notre Dame, IN.” This is the American based Holy Cross refugee services which is helpful to me.

II.

Aleinikoff, Thomas Alexander, David A. Martin, and Hiroshi Motomura. Immigration and Citizenship: Process and Policy. 7th ed. St. Paul, MN: Thomson/West, 2003 Print. 1. What is this source? Historical Information 2. Who wrote it? Thomas Alexander Aleinikoff 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? He’s a law professor at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington D.C. 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? This is not a source that is a proponent or opponent to the immigration ban set by Donald Trump. It is a book about immigration law that was originally published in 2003. This source will be helpful because it also analyzes the effects of past immigration laws on citizens and immigrants. The most recent immigration laws which drastically changed how the United States interacted with immigrants is in the 1980’s and the laws the Donald Trump is violating come from then. I plan to use this source as a history/background to understanding the increase in refugee

and immigrants the United States has been encountering in the past few years. II.

DeSilver, Drew. "U.S. Public Seldom Has Welcomed Refugees into Country." Pew Research Center. N.p., 19 Nov. 2015. Web. 12 Feb. 2017. 1. What is this source? Background Information 2. Who wrote it? The Pew Research Center 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? The Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that completes public polling research. They study U.S. politics and policy and provide easy to read facts. 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? This source provides statistical data that allows the reader to analyze American attitudes toward immigrants and refugees going as far back as WWII. This is important information because it will help me to analyze the attitude surrounding refugees and immigrants today. It appears there has been a rising hostility towards immigrants until 1999. In 1999 there was a 66% approval rating towards the Ethnic Albanians. In 2015 there was a 53% disapproval towards Syrian refugees.

II.

Markon, Jerry, Emma Brown, and Katherine Shaver. "Judge Halts Deportations as Refugee Ban Causes Worldwide Furor." The Washington Post. WP Company, 29 Jan. 2017. Web. 13 Feb. 2017. 1. What is this source: Washington Post 2. Who wrote it? Jerry Markon, Emma Brown and Katherine Shaver. All Staff Writers for the Washington Post. 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? They are staff writers for the Washington Post. 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? This piece analyzes the environment of Trumpâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s travel ban. This looks into how refugees are responded, how different countries are responding to it, and rising feelings to the refugees in the past few years.

II.

Chulov, Martin, Charlie Brinkhurst-Cuff, and Saeed Kamali Dehghan. "Muslim-majority Countries Show Anger at Trump Travel Ban." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 29 Jan. 2017. Web. 13 Feb. 2017 1. What is this source? Background Information-Opponents 2. Who wrote it? Staff writers for the Guardian 3. Why should I listen to the author/s? The Guardian is an authoritative newspaper because they fact check for any errors. 4. What is the thesis and what are the main points? How will you use this source? I think this source is incredibly interesting because I have a lot of sources from Christians but not a lot from Muslim sources. In fact, I’ve tried to research muslim sources but I only got one source that was written from a Christian writer that said Arab leaders support the ban and it didn’t seem very authoritative so I didn’t use it. So I think it’s important to understand the point of views from those who have been banned from the United States.