Update, July 12, 9:40 pm:

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is facing criticism, not only from Donald Trump and his supporters in the Republican party, but across the entire political spectrum for speaking her mind about Donald Trump. Questions are being raised about whether she may have violated judicial ethics, crossed the line between the Supreme Court and the political process, etc.

Granted, it may be unprecedented for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak so plainly and openly about a presidential candidate, though this question is best left to Supreme Court historians, of whom I am not one. But Donald Trump is no ordinary presidential candidate, and this fall's election is no ordinary election.

Based on an abundance of Trump's authoritarian, vindictive, threatening speeches and proposals, which I will not repeat here because I have referred to them so often previously and they are so well known by almost every American, the future of America's democracy is at risk.

There is a strong argument to be made that Justice Ginsburg may be doing an even greater service to America by using her position to stand up against Trump than she has been doing with her many years of service on the Court writing opinions and dissents that support America's real, most eseential values in so many ways.

Immigration advocates, especially, should welcome Justice Ginsburg's willingness to speak out against Trump, who openly demonizes, insults and attacks Latino, Muslim and other minority immigrant groups on the basis of race and religion in way that, arguably, has not been seen in America since the time of the Chinese exclusion laws or Know-Nothing agitation of the 19th Century; or the attacks on Jewish immigrants in the 1920's by another wealthy American business tycoon, Henry Ford.

America's race neutral (ostensibly) immigration system, including legal, not only unauthorized, immigration, is now under attack at its very foundations by a presidential candidate who is openly trying to attract white supremacist votes, who appeals to white supremacist groups and is actively supported by them, and whose immigration proposals reflect, if they are not actually based on, white supremacist ideology.

All supporters of maintaining America's relatively open, race neutral immigration system as we know it owe a great debt of gratitude to Justice Ginsburg's courage in speaking out against Donald Trump, even against severe criticism and risk to her own reputation. Hopefully, enough people will listen to her voice so that neither she nor large numbers of other Americans will have to talk, even in jest, about moving to New Zealand.

My original post follows:

Predictably, Donald Trump has blasted Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for her honest and courageous statement that she could not imagine what America would be like if Trump becomes President - a concern no doubt shared by millions of Americans who care about preserving our democracy and our diverse, multi-racial society based on fundamentally race-neutral, fair and open immigration policies.(with numerous imperfections and shortcomings), that have been in place for the past half century, ever since the bigoted, "Nordics only" Immigration Act of 1924 was abolished in 1965.



Would Trump, who is so anxious to build a Wall against Mexicans, bar Muslims because of religion and deport up to 12 million mainly Latino and Asian (as well as black and Middle Eastern) immigrants already in this country, take America back to an overtly white supremacist immigration system?

Trump has called Justice Ginsburg a "disgrace" to the Supreme Court and stated that he hopes she will leave the Court as soon as possible. Would he also ask her to recuse herself from any case involving the federal government (or Trump personally) if he were president, on the grounds of "hatred for Donald Trump", as in the case of Federal District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel?

Presumably, Trump would not attack Justice Ginsberg's impartiality on the grounds of her ancestry or religion, since she is not of Mexican descent and is not a Muslim. At least one would presume he would not do so, since those who argue that Trump is anti-Semitic have not come up with anything solid or convincing to justify that charge, and are relying on only circumstancial evidence or speculation.

Justice Ginsburg also joked that she might move to New Zealand if Trump becomes president. Would she be able to get a visa?

I am not an expert in New Zealand immigration law, but my preliminary research indicates that she might be able to get a retirement visa if she has enough money, The going rate, according to my research, is having assets equal to at least NZ$ 750,000. One New Zealand dollar is now worth about 73 cents US.

Possibly, although Justice Ginsburg is not licensed ro practice New Zealand Law, she might be able to get a skilled worker visa as a US law expert, or possibly a law professor. This requires further research.

One other area, which also requires further research, might be New Zealand political asylum law - something that might conceivably be of interest to quite a few other Americans, not just (if one were to speculate), Justice Ginsburg, if Donald Trump becomes president.
Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from various parts of the world obtain work visas and green cards.

Roger is admitted to practice before the US Supreme Court, but has not yet participated in a case before that Court. His email address is algaselex@gmail.com