Biden Blunders by Suing Iowa over Immigration

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

The bullies in D.C. have gone too far with Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit last Thursday against Iowa. Suing this state of Midwestern farmers is as much a political blunder as a legal one, as Biden trails in all battleground states similar to Iowa, including neighboring Wisconsin.

Iowa enacted a reasonable law last month making it a misdemeanor for an illegal alien, who has already been ordered to leave our country, to remain in Iowa. At a town hall sponsored by a pro-immigration group and attended by dozens of immigrants about this new statute, an anonymous written question asked, “Should I leave Iowa?”

The host sighed and replied, “Entiendo el sentido.” That means, in this context, “I see your point.”

Although Iowa is a thousand miles from the Mexican border, Biden “has secretly flown illegal immigrants into our state in the dead of night,” observed Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird. “Those who come into our country illegally have broken the law, yet Biden refuses to deport them,” Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds stated.

This new statute, Iowa Senate File 2340, makes it an aggravated misdemeanor for someone to remain in Iowa after being denied admission or previously ordered to leave our country. Upon signing this bill into law, Gov. Reynolds observed that “the Biden Administration has failed to enforce our nation’s immigration laws, putting the protection and safety of Iowans at risk.”

Scheduled to take effect on July 1, this law authorizes Iowa officials to send illegal migrants to a border port of entry, allowing federal officials to deal with them there. Contrary to misleading claims by opponents of this and similar legislation in Texas, no state officials are authorized to deport anyone.

Biden’s DOJ relies on a Supreme Court decision against a 2010 Arizona law that created a state misdemeanor for violations of federal immigration law, and authorized police to arrest suspected illegal aliens who commit deportable crimes. Only two of the five Justices who joined that bad Arizona v. United States (2012) decision are still on the Court, and the three new Justices appointed by Trump would probably vote to overturn it.

The DOJ quotes that decision an astounding 14 times in its 19-page lawsuit against Iowa. As Justice Kennedy did so often during his 30 years on the Court, he resorted in that decision to vapid platitudes, saying that “the history of the United States is in part made of the stories, talents, and lasting contributions of those who crossed oceans and deserts to come here.”

The millions of illegals allowed in by Biden did not have to cross “oceans and deserts” to get here, but simply walked across our unguarded southern border. Courts should have retired the Arizona v. United States decision when Kennedy did, six years ago, because the Constitution protects the police power of every state to establish law and order within its own borders.

The Iowa law is similar to the good Texas law enacted last year. Biden has tied that one up in court, benefiting from an appellate panel assignment that includes one Biden appointee and one liberal Republican, who have blocked enforcement of Texas SB 4.

The DOJ’s recent lawsuit against Iowa was assigned to an Obama-appointed trial judge, who will presumably block its enforcement in June. But then this case will proceed quickly on an expedited appeal to the Eighth Circuit in St. Louis, where the judges are 16-to-1 Republican-appointed, so Biden and the DOJ will not have a friendly Democrat majority as in D.C.

Nothing in the Iowa statute interferes with the ability of Biden to enforce federal laws against illegal immigration, which Biden has utterly failed to do. Nothing in the Iowa law interferes with Biden’s ability to frame foreign policy, unless his policy is to invite the whole world to resettle in the United States.

Trump vows to allow states to enforce laws as enacted in Texas and Iowa. Immediately upon Trump’s taking office on January 20, all of this lawfare by the DOJ can be terminated, and states can begin to reduce the unlawfulness caused by illegal aliens.

Seizures of deadly fentanyl by border patrol shot up nearly 6-fold between 2020 and 2023. Counterfeit fentanyl produced in Mexico and China, which has increased in one year from 71 to 115 million pills seized in 2023, is designed to look deceptively like lawful medication.

Farmer Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who visits all of Iowa’s 99 counties annually while maintaining a perfect attendance record in the U.S. Senate, told Biden in 2021 that “border security’s essential in keeping out public safety threats, and a cartel-controlled border presents our greatest criminal threat.” The D.C. elite heads for defeat in the Eighth Circuit at the hands of Iowa farmers defending our nation against the invasion.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

RNC Steps Up for Election Integrity

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

Early voting for the presidential election begins in September, and election integrity needs to be a top priority. Trump leads in polls, but a slim margin can be unfairly overcome by last-minute drop-box ballot dumps or mailed-in ballots not received until after Election Day.

Fortunately, the Republican National Committee (RNC), which just wrapped up its spring meeting at and near Mar-a-Lago in Florida, steps up its efforts to combat election fraud. Led by Michael Whatley as its new chairman, along with the telegenic Lara Trump as co-chair, the RNC has filed dozens of lawsuits in swing states to ensure compliance with laws concerning mail-in voting.

Last Friday, the RNC sued to stop the counting of ballots after Election Day in Nevada. The U.S. Constitution requires that there be one election day, not a week’s or month’s worth of backroom ballot counting.

Whatley said about monitoring elections, “You got to have observers and attorneys in the room when the votes are being cast, and when the votes are being counted. So we’re in the process of recruiting tens of thousands of volunteers, thousands of attorneys all across the country so that when we get into the election season, we’re going to be in the room.”

Last week help surprisingly came from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, where three Democrat-appointed judges sided with Republicans to vote 10-4 to deny reconsideration of a good decision upholding the statute requiring signatures and dates on mail-in ballot envelopes in Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court had already approved this, but this litigation in federal court had prevented it from being enforced, and even now the ACLU vows to seek further review.

Whatley, whose emphasis on election integrity in 2020 in North Carolina enabled Trump to win that hotly contested battleground state, applauds this ruling as “a crucial victory for election integrity and voter confidence.” Whatley has led the RNC to file additional lawsuits in 23 states to enhance election integrity as posted on protecthevote.com.

In 2020 Pennsylvania allowed 2.7 million mailed-in ballots without any verification of signature or requirement of a witness or notary. Even far-Left California at least ostensibly requires verification of signatures on mailed-in ballots.

Poll watchers traditionally safeguarded election integrity by watching what happens at precincts as people vote in person. Trump and other Republicans repeatedly win the in-person voting by landslides, only to have the elections taken away from them based on millions of ballots cast in a process that bypasses poll watching.

Ballot harvesting and drop-box ballot dumping, by which workers hired by Democrats bundle large numbers of ballots, combine with mostly unverified millions of mail-in ballots to overwhelm the voters who cast their ballots in-person on Election Day. There should be transparency as to who cast these mail-in ballots and what their alleged signatures look like, but candidates are denied any way to protect against fraudulent voting practices by opponents.

The RNC sued Arizona and Michigan to require them to perform signature matching on mail-in ballots. Without signature matching, Democrats can send in hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots using hired operatives while bypassing the voters themselves.

Michigan and Nevada, two must-win states for both Trump and Biden this year, have been slow in purging their election rolls of people who died or moved away. The RNC compared census data to voter registration and found discrepancies, and sued to enforce the federal law that requires these states to eliminate the phony voters.

Overpaid consultants do not win elections; volunteers do. More than half of the fundraising by RNC and Trump for the month of April came from small donors, and these grassroots are who need to be mobilized to overcome the monetary and media advantages held by Democrats.

Liberals obtained numerous court orders in their favor in 2020 to invalidate good laws, and they are suing again this cycle in places like the pivotal must-win state of Wisconsin. A lawsuit by progressives there seeks to toss out a reasonable law that requires all ballots be counted by 8 pm the evening of Election Day.

The RNC sought to intervene to defend this law, stating that it establishes “appropriate safeguards and transparency while still offering voters ample opportunities to cast a ballot.” Lawsuits like this should not be decided without the full participation of the affected Republican Party, but a state court unjustifiably blocked RNC and the local GOP from intervening.

Some wonder if Republican polling leads will be enough to overcome a predictable repetition of ballot harvesting, drop-box ballot dumping, and unverified mail-in signatures by Democrats. In the key swing states of the last two election cycles, oversight was not allowed by poll watchers to monitor signatures on millions of mail-in ballots.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.