Realistically, should the United States Be bringing in vast amounts of immigrants who are unable to stand on their own two feet, ones who will immediately be living off the largess of the taxpayers? A goodly chunk of nations around the world require people to have usable skills and the ability to provide for themselves in order to immigrate. Of course, this has made liberal outlets upset, such as CNN
5-4 Supreme Court allows rule to take effect that could reshape legal immigration
The Supreme Court in a 5-4 vote Monday cleared the way for the Trump administration to make it more difficult for low-income immigrants seeking to come to or trying to remain legally in the United States.
The so-called public charge rule, unveiled in August, impacts people who rely on public assistance, including most forms of Medicaid, food stamps and housing vouchers.
It made national headlines last summer when then-acting Director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services Ken Cuccinelli, in his defense of the rule, revised the iconic poem on the Statue of Liberty’s pedestal, saying: “Give me your tired and your poor who can stand on their own two feet and who will not become a public charge.”
Advocates and several states immediately opposed the rule, arguing that the changes would penalize immigrants who rely on temporary assistance from the government and impose costs on the states.
And that is exactly the point. When people were coming in to the US via Ellis Island, the government was not providing food stamps and welfare and healthcare and such: they had to earn their way. Why should the U.S. now be letting in people who will be essentially wards of the state? Forbes notes (in an article that is having a meltdown over this SCOTUS ruling)
Immigration analysts expect implementation of the public charge rule to be ruthless. An applicant would be denied permanent residence if a consular officer or immigration adjudicator, in effect, issues a prediction that an individual might use certain benefits for 12 months within a future 36-month period. U.S. District Judge George Daniels observed there is no precedent for this type of definition in the history of U.S. law.
The Migration Policy Institute concludes, “[N]early half of the U.S. noncitizen population could be at risk of a public-charge determination – up from the current 3%.†The technology startup Boundless estimates up to 200,000 young married couples could be at risk of not qualifying for a spousal green card under the regulation.
Should up to 50% of the people allowed in need public assistance? People who initially apply for citizenship already need to be able to stand on their own two feet to qualify. Why not the rest? This will cause a massive reduction in the number of refugees and such, as well as them bringing their family members over
(Fox News) The rule, announced by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in August, defines a “public charge†as an immigrant who received one or more designated benefits for more than 12 months within a 36-month period.
Those benefits that would be designated included Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), as well as most forms of Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps.
What most are forgetting about is that it could very impact those who are here illegally from being granted legal status, including DREAMers. Oops. Bummer.
A 2019 Urban Institute study found that people are already being deterred from applying for benefits for their U.S.-born children, fearing that it could harm their own immigration status. The study also found that 14 percent of nearly 2,000 adults who were born outside the U.S. or living with foreign-born family members have been dissuaded from participating in public benefit programs for fear it would impact their chances to obtain green cards, The Los Angeles Times reported last year.
The rule does not penalize applicants for benefits received by a family member, like a child who is a citizen. But many are scared and need convincing.
This is primarily talking about illegal aliens who had anchor babies.
Overall, shouldn’t the U.S. want to bring in people who can provide value, rather than be wards of the state? Shouldn’t our forcibly taken tax money be used to help Americans?
Read: Trump Administration’s “Public Charge” Rule Wins At Supreme Court »
The US nonprofit Avaaz has a 
While presenting the Democrats’ case for impeachment on the Senate floor, lead impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-CA) kept referencing 17 witnesses who testified during the House impeachment inquiry. But there were 18 of them. Schiff and the Democrats are refusing to release the testimony of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, and according to Republicans who were present during Atkinson’s closed-door testimony, the reason the transcript hasn’t been released is because it proves both the whistleblower and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff did not tell the truth about their contact with each other.
Students and staff anxious about climate change are being offered therapy to tackle feelings of anger, guilt and grief.
John Bolton, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, will claim in his upcoming book that the president wanted to withhold military aid from Ukraine until officials in the country announced investigations into Joe Biden and his family, the New York Times 
Despite recent and increasing efforts by the United States and other governments to narrow their interpretations of the refugee definition and to shirk their protection responsibilities, the need to expand the grounds for asylum is becoming increasingly urgent as the consequences of climate change become more pronounced.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) revealed Saturday he has drafted motions to subpoena former Vice President Joe Biden, his youngest son Hunter Biden, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA), and the so-called “whistleblower.â€
