top of page
  • Writer's pictureWGON

Judges OK’s Lawsuit to Curb Migration with Environmental Rules

Immigration reformers have won the first round of a lawsuit that could force the government to protect Americans’ natural environment by curbing legal and illegal migration.

“The policies implemented unilaterally by the Biden Administration, which have encouraged more than a million foreign nationals to enter and settle in the United States [since January 2021], are the quintessential type of action” covered by the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act, said a statement from Julie Axelrod, at the Center for Immigration Studies.

The 1970 law was “passed out of a concern for population growth … The Center looks forward to litigating whether the Biden Administration violated NEPA when it took the actions that have created the ongoing border crisis,” she added.

The first round was won on August 16, when CIS got approval to file the lawsuit from Judge Trevor McFadden of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires agencies to conduct environmental impact analysis before undertaking “major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.” For now, the Court accepts the [CIS] Coalition’s factual allegations as true and “presum[es] that general allegations embrace those specific facts that are necessary to support [a] claim.” At summary judgment, however, the Coalition must offer admissible evidence affirmatively establishing its standing to proceed and entitlement to vindication on the merits.

On the same day, a government body announced it would sharply reduce the flow of water from the Colorado River to the surrounding states whose populations and water use have been inflated by both legal and illegal migration. reported:

The Bureau of Reclamation called for all seven Colorado River Basin states [California, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming] to conserve water over the next four years and said it will withhold 21% of Arizona’s annual allocation of Colorado River water in 2023 as the first-ever water shortage in the Colorado River Basin continues for another year, the agency said.

The establishment, pro-Democrat environmental groups have long ignored the damaging impact of migration. In 2018, the CIS reported;

The Sierra Club, one of America’s largest non-profit environmental organizations, once treated the effects of immigration-driven population growth as among the most serious concerns facing America’s environment. However, over the past few decades, the organization has continually retreated from that position toward neutrality — and more recently has openly lobbied for higher levels of immigration into the United States. In fact, the club is now starting to launch partisan attacks on the current administration over everything from family separation and detentions along the border to amnesty for illegal aliens to the border wall.

Surveys by Rasmussen Reports show broad public concern about the impact of the government’s immigration policy on the nation’s environment.

For example, a survey of 1,250 likely voters in July 2022 showed that 437 percent of respondents agreed that “immigration-driven population growth [should] be reduced to limit the expansion of cities into U.S. wildlife habitats and farmland.”

Just 23 percent disagreed, and 28 percent said “Not sure.”

Republicans split 57 percent agree, 18 percent disagree.

Democrats split 46 percent agree, 27 percent disagree.

Swing-voting independents split 44 percent to 24 percent.

Extraction Migration

Since at least 1990, the D.C. establishment has extracted tens of millions of legal and illegal migrants — plus temporary visa workers — to serve as workers, managers, consumers, and renters for various U.S. investors and Wall Street.

This Extraction Migration policy tilts the economy against ordinary Americans. It reduces wages, damages career development, reduces family income, and raises the price of homes.

The policy slows innovation and shrinks Americans’ productivity, partly because it rewards investors who build stock values with cheap labor in a consumer economy instead of with high-productivity works in a manufacturing economy.

The policy has shoved at least ten million American men out of the labor force. It undermines employees’ workplace rights, and it widens the regional wealth gaps between the Democrats’ big coastal states and the Republicans’ heartland and southern states.

An economy built on extraction migration also drains Americans’ political clout over elites, alienates young people, and radicalizes Americans’ democratic civic culture because it allows wealthy elites to ignore the replaceable and despairing Americans at the bottom of society.

The economic policy is backed by progressives who wish to transform the U.S. from a society governed by European-origin civic culture into a progressive-directed empire of competitive, resentful identity groups. “We’re trying to become the first multiracial, multi-ethnic superpower in the world,” Rep. Rohit Khanna (D-CA) told the New York Times in March 2022. “It will be an extraordinary achievement … we will ultimately triumph,” he boasted.

The progressives’ colonialism-like economic strategy kills many migrants. It exploits the poverty of migrants and splits foreign families as it extracts human resources from poor home countries to serve wealthy U.S. investors. This migration policy weakens national security by minimizing shareholder pressure on U.S. companies to train cohorts of Americans, or to build up beneficial and complementary trade with people in poor countries.

Business-backed progressive advocates hide this Extraction Migration economic policy behind a wide variety of noble-sounding explanations and theatrical border security programs. Progressives claim that the U.S. is a “Nation of Immigrants,” that migration is good for migrants, and that the state must renew itself by replacing populations.

Establishment Republicans and major GOP donors hide the wealth shift by focusing conservative media coverage on border chaos, welfare spending, migrant crime, and drugs.

Many polls show the public wants to welcome some immigration — but they also show a deep and broad public opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into jobs sought by young U.S. graduates.

3 views1 comment

1 Comment

Aug 17, 2022

I do not see any women in the picture. Gives one pause.

bottom of page