How the United States treats illegal crimes, how to solve them, and how to kill them is in the bud.

Explanation:

By Tom Jawetz July 22, 2019, 4:45 am

Restoring the Rule of Law Through a Fair, Humane, and Workable Immigration System

Getty/Mario Tama

New U.S. citizens gather at a naturalization ceremony, March 2018.

OVERVIEW

Policymakers must break free of the false dichotomy of America as either a nation of immigrants or a nation of laws, and advance an immigration system that is fair, humane, and actually works.

PRESS CONTACT

For more information and updates on this topic, see CAP’s series: “Reframing the Immigration Debate.”

Introduction and summary

The immigration debate in America today is nearly as broken as the country’s immigration system itself. For too many years, the conversation has been predicated on a false dichotomy that says America can either honor its history and traditions as a nation of immigrants1 or live up to its ideals as a nation of laws by enforcing the current immigration system.2 Presented with this choice,3 supporters of immigration—people who recognize the value that immigrants bring to American society, its culture, and its economy, as well as the important role that immigrants play in the nation’s continued prosperity—have traditionally seized the mantle of defending America as a nation of immigrants.4 By doing this, however, rather than challenging the dichotomy itself, supporters have ceded powerful rhetorical ground to immigration restrictionists, who are happy to masquerade as the sole defenders of America as a nation of laws.5 The fundamental problem with this debate is that America is, and has always been, both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. Debates over a liberal immigration policy actually predate the start of the nation itself; they infused the drafting of the U.S. Constitution, America’s founding document

i belive the continental association was created to boycott all contact with british goods.

i also belive it was in december 1, 1774

the assassination of president lincoln was just one part of a larger plot to decapitate the federal government of the u.s. after the civil war. the first reaction to lincoln’s death was disbelief. then it quickly changed to grief. abraham lincoln’s death created an outpouring of grief from citizens in both the north and the south.

explanation:

lincoln was the first u.s. president to be assassinated. president abraham lincoln, america’s civil war leader, was assassinated just five days after confederate general robert e. lee surrendered his army at appomattox court house, ending the four-year war between the states. on the evening of april 14, 1865, lincoln was attending a performance of our american cousin at ford’s theatre in washington, d.c. john wilkes booth – a 26-year old actor, confederate sympathizer, and white supremacist – slipped into the presidential box and shot lincoln in the head. john wilkes booth and his conspirators had initially planned to kidnap lincoln to save the confederate states. but as the confederacy faltered, booth’s thoughts turned to murder. booth may have decided to act on his hatred after lincoln endorsed giving the right to vote to african-american men who had served in the union army.