Immigration
Immigration | Restricting Immigration Would Not Prevent Terrorism
Efforts to prevent terrorism should not include severe restrictions on immigration, contends Daniel T. Griswold in the following viewpoint. He grants that the U.S. government has a duty to protect the nation’s borders by denying entry to those with criminal or terrorist connections. However, the vast majority of immigrants and potential immigrants are law-abiding, peaceful people, and they should not be blamed for terrorism, Griswold maintains. The United States has always welcomed people from around the world who sought work, freedom, and opportunities to improve their lives....
[The entire page is 1210 words long]
Navigate
- Introduction
-
Historical Debate: Should Immigration Be Restricted?
- Chapter 1 Preface
- America Should Welcome Immigration (1845)
- America Should Discourage Immigration (1849)
- Restrictions on Immigration Are Necessary (1913)
- Restrictions on Immigration Are Not Necessary (1912)
- National Origins Quotas Should Be Abolished (1963)
- National Origins Quotas Should Be Retained (1964)
- Is Immigration a Serious Problem?
- How Should the United States Address Illegal Immigration?
-
How Should U.S. Immigration Policy Be Reformed?
- Chapter 4 Preface
- Immigration Should Be Restricted
- Immigration Should Not Be Restricted
- The United States Must Restrict Immigration to Prevent Terrorism
- Restricting Immigration Would Not Prevent Terrorism
- The U.S. Government Should Discourage Dual Citizenship
- Dual Citizenship Is Not a Threat to the United States
- Birthright Citizenship Should Be Repealed
- Naturalization and Birthright Citizenship Should Be Encouraged
- Dual Citizenship Is Not a Threat to the United States
- For Further Discussion
- Organizations to Contact
- Bibliography
- Copyright
Tell a friend about Immigration at eNotes.
