{"id":24082,"date":"2021-01-27T13:53:34","date_gmt":"2021-01-27T18:53:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=24082"},"modified":"2021-01-27T13:53:36","modified_gmt":"2021-01-27T18:53:36","slug":"higher-ed-happy-biden-immigration-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2021\/01\/27\/higher-ed-happy-biden-immigration-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"Colleges Need a New School of Thought on Immigration"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Some\nof the loudest cheers at Joe Biden\u2019s inauguration came from America\u2019s colleges\nand universities. After four years of playing defense, higher education sees\nitself back on offense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe last four years have been a real grind, and we are looking forward to turning the page,\u201d said Maureen Martin, director of Immigration Services for Harvard\u2019s International Office<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities<\/a> (APLU), representing 245 schools across the U.S., took a few parting shots at the Trump administration\u2019s \u201chorrifically misguided travel ban\u201d while the collegiate Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration<\/a> hailed its efforts to block stronger student visa policies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In an Inauguration Day statement, the Alliance laid out its expansive wish list<\/a>: \u201cA robust roadmap to citizenship for the nation\u2019s undocumented population \u2026 clearing various visa backlogs, ending per-country caps, expanding access to green cards for international student graduates, and extending work permits and pathways for dependents.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is an\narticle of faith at the Ivory Tower that the more immigration, the better. This\nmakes sense from a pecuniary perspective: U.S. colleges and universities\ncollected $39 billion in foreign-student tuition in 2016, a figure that\ndeclined during Trump\u2019s tenure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On immigration policy, the higher-education sector may be the least ideologically diverse place on Earth, says John Wahala<\/a>, writing for the Center for Immigration Studies. He cites a 2014-2015 study that found lockstep opposition to any immigration restrictions or enforcement. Among 125 college presentations on immigration issues, only one debate and one forum included any dissenting viewpoints.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s not likely that ratio has changed much. Lynn Pasquerella<\/a>, president of the Association of American Colleges & Universities, summed up the group think in 2018 when she parroted the globalist mantra that national borders are \u201cjust accidents of history.\u201d Anyone who disagrees is dismissed as mentally or morally defective \u2013 or both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Looking for ways out of the campus echo chamber, George La Noue<\/a>, professor emeritus at the University of Maryland, says higher education must return to the basics. He would revitalize the immigration discussion by using yes or no questions as a starting point. For example: Are national borders legitimate? Should assimilation be pursued? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wahala\nreasons that if higher education addresses such foundational questions in a\ncivil and dispassionate manner then students and faculty can move on to more\nnuanced propositions: How many Americans should there be? What sanctions should\nthere be for violating immigration law?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Amid its\npartisan cheerleading, does higher ed have the intellectual curiosity and\ncapacity to honestly take up the debate? The answer will speak volumes about\nAmerica\u2019s future.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Some of the loudest cheers at Joe Biden\u2019s inauguration came from America\u2019s colleges and universities. After four years of playing defense, higher education sees itself back on offense. \u201cThe last four years have been a real grind, and we are looking forward to turning the page,\u201d said Maureen Martin, director of Immigration Services for Harvard\u2019s<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":22084,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[12],"tags":[10413,1524,397,8606],"yst_prominent_words":[10787,9369,2433,8376,2304,2454,5498,1963,10789,3208,8223,2016,10786,4801,2560,1939,3839,2172,10788],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24082"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24082"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24082\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24083,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24082\/revisions\/24083"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/22084"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24082"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24082"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24082"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=24082"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}