Donald Trump is not even the new president yet, and already there is talk about the possibility of his being impeached by Congress over his immigration proposals.

Surprisingly, however, this suggestion is not only coming from Trump's opponents, some of whom are understandably concerned about the effect that his proposals for mass deportation of up to 3 million so-called "criminal aliens" in the United States (a much greater number than in all likelihood actually exist, according to the Migration Policy Institute), and his call for a ban on Muslim immigration (or "extreme vetting" of immigrants from Muslim countries, which arguably amounts to the same thing) could have on the constitutional rights and freedoms of American citizens as well as immigrants - see

Talk of possible impeachment over Trump's immigration policies is also coming from some of his own most ardent supporters, including Breitbart News, headed by none other than Trump's own pick for Senior Presidential advisor, Stephen Bannon.

In a December 17 Breitbart News article by former Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo, a long time supporter of ultra-harsh immigration enforcement policies, who is also critical of the 1965 immigration reform law that abolished 80 years of whites-only immigration policies that were embedded in our immigration laws prior to that time (see my December 25 post), Tancredo suggests that Trump could be impeached by a Republican-controlled Congress for allegedly being "too strict" about immigration enforcement.

Tancredo writes in his above Breitbart News article as follows:

"...Congress's Republican leadership is busy doubling down on dissonance and disloyalty."

He gives two immigration-related examples:

" * Senator Lindsey Graham is joining Democrats in sponsoring new legislation to protect the "Dreamers" from deportation after their unlawfully granted legal status and work permits expire.

* Senator Susan Collins will oppose any restrictions on Muslim refugees, no matter how weak and inadequate the vetting to weed out jihadists."

Tancredo's attack on Republicans who, allegedly, might fail to line up in lockstep with Trump on immigration then moves over to the House:

"And then, on the House side, we have the naysayer in chief, speaker Paul Ryan...who has vowed to obstruct Trump's most important and most popular campaign promise - and end to open borders and vigorous immigration law enforcement."


Tancredo: Would Republican Establishment Use Impeachment to Block Trump Agenda?

Tancredo does not mention how the Republicans in Congress might actually go about impeaching Trump, or what grounds they might conceivably use. But here is one suggestion:

If Trump's plan is to accuse anyone who disagrees with him about immigration (or any other issue) of being, in Tancredo's above Breitbart News article's phrase: "disloyal" [to the "presidency", to paraphrase Richard Nixon, or to America, as Senator Joseph McCarthy infamously accused his opponents of being in the 1950's]. then there could indeed be need for a serious discussion of possible grounds for impeachment.

We have in this country something known as the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, which protects freedom of speech and other expressions of political opinion. When a president take office, he (or she) is required to take an oath to protect and defend that Constitution.

Violating that oath could be legitimate grounds for impeachment. If the head of Breitbart News, who happens to be the incoming president's designated Senior Advisor, is so worried that his new boss might be impeached - by his own party - he might do well to advise the president that suggesting that anyone who disagrees with him is "disloyal" could raise problems about commitment to free speech that might, conceivably one day be grounds for impeachment.

This is not to suggest that this is the only ground on which the new president might be subject to being prevented from carrying out his immigration agenda through impeachment.

There could others, including something known as Trump University, and a landmark, critically important Supreme Court decision: Kleindienst v. Mandel (1972) dealing with how the Constitutional rights of US citizens could be adversely affected by excluding certain classes of immigrants from entry to the United States, which will be discussed in forthcoming installments in this series.
Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School who has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants obtain work visas and green cards for more than 35 years.

Roger's email address is