I think the self cancel is in there because your side is fearful the emergency closure provision will work too well and the American people won't let you cancel it.

As I've said several times, I think the more likely explanation is because these provisions are probably a violation of international human rights requirements. It's pretty well established that basic human rights require giving refugees at least a hearing - even just an administrative hearing - before you expel them. You have to provide at least minimal due process to plead their case. Here, we're planning on violating that - expelling refugees before they have a chance to plead their case to anyone. Even the ones that genuinely and legitimately will be persecuted if they return to their home countries.

A permanent provision that imposes moratoria on even applying for asylum is likely a human rights violation - something the U.S. is generally loathe to do. Even the temporary measure probably violates our treaty obligations and the human rights of the asylees, but at least framing it as a temporary measure in response to a unique set of circumstances would give the U.S. something to say.

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.