Update: February 22, 12:16 pm

On February 21, the Republican Supreme Court majority lifted the stay against the racist Trump-Miller, immigrant Public Charge rule which had been effect in Illinois, the only state to be previously immune from the contagion of the Trump administration's latest move toward fascism in America.

In a ringing dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor condemned the majority's decision as eroding the "fair and balanced decisionmaking process that this Court must strive to protect."

Wolf v. Cook County Case number 10A906 (2020)

Meanwhile the New Yorker features a detailed analysis of the way that Stephen Miller has made himself the one man dictator of immigration policy under Dona;d Trump, and is caring out there racist Donald Trump agenda with a fervor and devotion to his Leader that recalls the dark history 20th century fascist regimes in Europe.

See (February 21):


My earlier comments follow below.

It is easy to try to dismiss using the word "fascism" in connection with Donald Trump's agenda of vilification and persecution against immigrants who are not from "Countries like Norway." (to use his own expression). But "fascist" is not just an epithet
used by people who are opposed to Trump's immigration policies, similar to his own racial attacks immigrants as "criminals", "rapists" "drug dealers", "gang members" "invaders" and "snakes".

Fascism is ultimate state power, where the will of one Leader replaces the rule of law, and arbitrary actions in the interests of suppressing, excluding or removing targeted minorities from a nation's society and territory become official government policy. Fascism is based on the use of the "Big LIe "; on employing hatred and prejudice against "outsiders", and on using fear and violence against opponents and other people deemed to be undesirable, while depriving them of them human rights. Claims by Trump officials that the new Public Charge rule is only meant to promote immigrant "self-sufficiency" is one clear example of the fascist "Big Lie" strategy.

All of these elements are present in Donald Trump's immigration agenda in general, and in his new Public Charge rule in particular, A compliant Republican Supreme Court majority that has put support for presidential power ahead of America's core values of racial justice and judicial independence (just as the Court did in the notorious 1944 Korematsu decision dealing with internment of Japanese-Americans) has allowed this rule to go into effect, at lest temporarily while the litigation on the merits of the rule continues in the lower courts.

Accordingly, the new rule will take effect this coming Monday, February 24, 2020 - a day that will truly live in infamy in American immigration history.

Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell describes exactly how arbitrary and authoritarian the Public Charge rule in fact is in her February 20 article:

The Trump administration's green card Catch-22.

She writes:

"Thanks to what it calls the 'public charge' rule, immigration officials are permitted to deny green cards (among other visas) if they suspect that the applicant might use government benefits someday - ''at any time in the future'. Exactly what this means, or how one might make such a prediction, is frustratingly vague.

The Trump administration admits as much. As it acknowledges in its rule, divining whether a person might, say, apply for food stamps or Medicaid in 30 years is 'inherently subjective in nature.'"

Rampell also points out that one of the "negative" factors that immigration officers will be directed to consider under the new rule will be the very fact that the applicant may be applying for a green card! She explains:

"But the USCIS manual tells its offices to conclude [that]...getting a green card makes an immigrant a greater risk for someday becoming a 'public charge' because 'they intend to reside permanently in the United States and...are eligible for more public benefits than' foreigners without green cards."

In other words,according to this official guidance, the very act of applying for a green card may make someone less qualified to receive one than a person who does not apply! This Orwellian concept has nothing to do with the rule of law. It is nothing other than an exercise in arbitrary state power, also known a fascism.

But the purpose of this new rule - and it is new despite the Big Lie put out by Trump officials that thi wildly expanded new rule, with its long list of disqualifying benefit and other factors, is merely a restatement of previous public charge rules - such as the one in the notorious Chinese Exclusion laws or in legislation that resulted in barring possibly hundreds of thousands of Jewish immigrants trying to escape occupied Europe in the 1930's and early 1940's - is clear.

As Rampell writes, it is merely the latest part of a wider agenda intended to make drastic reductions in non-European legal immigration: She states:

"The administration has also, among other recent actions, expanded the travel ban, racheted down refugee admissions, increased rejection rates of skilled worker visas, tried to place impossible-to-meet requirements upon immigrants and begun rejecting asylum applications on bogus grounds, such as leaving blank the field for 'middle name' when the applicant doesn't have a middle name."

But, Rampell concludes, the new Public Charge will most likely ave ha much greater effect in reducing legal immigration [especially from outside White Europe] than all the other actions of the Trump administration put together - as much as 30 per cent compared to the last year before Trump took office.

But this draconian new rule, which is far removed from any notion of fundamental fairness or due process on which our legal system and democracy depend, is more than just one more anti-immigrant strategy coming out of Donald Trump's and Stephen Miller's White House. It is a major step toward fascist dictatorship in America, as i will show in Part 2 of this 2-part series,

Roger Algase
Attorney at Law
Harvard Law School LL.B
Harvard College A.B.