{"id":24438,"date":"2021-04-21T13:30:07","date_gmt":"2021-04-21T17:30:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=24438"},"modified":"2021-04-21T13:30:09","modified_gmt":"2021-04-21T17:30:09","slug":"arizona-sues-biden-admin-migrants-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2021\/04\/21\/arizona-sues-biden-admin-migrants-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"Arizona Lawsuit Blasts Biden\u2019s \u2018Pinnacle of Hypocrisy\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Citing\u00a0national environmental law, Arizona<\/a> is suing to overturn the White House’s cancellation of border wall construction and the “Remain in Mexico” policy.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“It\nis estimated that every person, every migrant that crosses our desert is\nbringing six to eight pounds \u2013 plastic bags, drug paraphernalia, backpacks \u2013\nthat\u2019s left in our desert. That\u2019s about a million pounds of trash in one\nmonth,\u201d said Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Migrants, like everyone else, \u201cneed housing, infrastructure, hospitals and schools. They drive cars, purchase goods, and use public parks and other facilities. Their actions also directly result in the release of pollutants, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, which directly affects air quality. All of these activities have significant environment impact,\u201d states the lawsuit<\/a> filed in U.S. District Court last week.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The National Environmental Policy Act<\/a> (NEPA) requires<\/a>\u00a0federal agencies to evaluate the impact of all major government actions that may significantly affect the quality of the \u201chuman environment\u201d and to issue environmental impact statements for ones that would. In enacting the 1970 law, Congress<\/a> expressed particular concern about \u201cthe profound influences of population growth.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While the White House has not commented on the lawsuit, Mark Krikorian<\/a> at the Center for Immigration Studies said the administration is flouting congressional intent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe\nDemocrats\u2019 diagnosis is that the massive and growing flow of illegal aliens is\nnot being processed fast enough into the U.S. The numerical\nimmigration limits and eligibility rules established by Congress are being\ncomprehensively subverted [in a]conscious decision to permit the large-scale\nadmission of illegal aliens and to collude in systematic abuse of our asylum\nlaw.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even before the current spike in border crossings, the urban clustering effect of migrants has contributed to sharply higher housing costs<\/a> in U.S. cities. By contrast, Arizona\u2019s enactment of a universal E-Verify law was credited with lower costs<\/a> as illegal aliens departed the state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cNothing should be more bipartisan than making infrastructure more accessible and housing more affordable for working people and young families. The economic and social hardships caused by runaway population growth are serious and become more serious the longer they are not addressed,\u201d wrote Dale Wilcox at the Immigration Reform Law Institute<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Brnovich\nadded: “It\u2019s the pinnacle of hypocrisy for the Biden administration to\nclaim it wants to protect our environment, while not enforcing federal statutes\nthat are specifically designed for that purpose.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Citing\u00a0national environmental law, Arizona is suing to overturn the White House’s cancellation of border wall construction and the “Remain in Mexico” policy.\u00a0 “It is estimated that every person, every migrant that crosses our desert is bringing six to eight pounds \u2013 plastic bags, drug paraphernalia, backpacks \u2013 that\u2019s left in our desert. That\u2019s about a<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":16213,"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":[10],"tags":[35,11112,778,1524],"yst_prominent_words":[3926,2019,4589,2043,11311,3677,5395,2013,2008,1963,2520,4202,2030,2016,11314,2095,8256,11313,1939,1998],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24438"}],"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=24438"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24438\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24439,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24438\/revisions\/24439"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/16213"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24438"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24438"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24438"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=24438"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}