Thursday, November 19, 2015
Immprofs around the country are speaking out against those states that are "refusing" to accept Syrian refugees.
Writing for WaPo, immprofs Pratheepan Gulasekaram and Karthick Ramakrishnan note: "No matter what these governors say as part of their political grandstanding, states cannot actually stop Syrian refugees from settling within their borders." But, they note, "while these governors have little legal ground to stand on, their statements nevertheless showcase the practical and symbolic importance of states even in matters traditionally understood to be beyond their purview."
Immprof Anita Maddali has a long and very thoughtful post on the Youth Circulations blog. She presents a careful history of refugee law as well as a detailed look at the current refugee selection process. She calls upon "all U.S. governors and their constituents to learn from history, to resist fear, and to transform the suffering of Syrian refugees into a life of hope in America."
Writing for Fortune, immprof Susan Martin places the governors' conduct in a historical context, noting that security fears kept the U.S. from helping Jewish refugees during WW2. She concludes: "It would be unfortunate if we as a country returned to the fears and prejudices of the past, which are as unfounded today as they were then."
Meanwhile immprof Steve Legomsky has been talking to a number of outlets about the legality of the states' conduct and the strength of the current screening process. HuffPo put together a great graphic: