Obama Admin Unilaterally Changes Law to Allow Immigrants with ‘Limited’ Terror Contact into US

Caroline May, Daily Caller, February 5, 2014

The Obama administration has issued new exemptions to a law that bars certain asylum-seekers and refugees who provided “limited material support” to terrorists who are believed to pose no threat from the U.S.

The Department of Homeland Security and the State Department published the new exemptions Wednesday in the Federal Register to narrow a ban in the Immigration and Nationality Act excluding refugees and asylum seekers who had provided limited material support, no matter how minor, to terrorists.

“These exemptions cover five kinds of limited material support that have adversely and unfairly affected refugees and asylum seekers with no tangible connection to terrorism: material support that was insignificant in amount or provided incidentally in the course of everyday social, commercial, family or humanitarian interactions, or under significant pressure,” a DHS official explained to The Daily Caller.


DHS contends that the law change is “commonsense” and that immigration procedures will remain the same in other respects.

“In addition to rigorous background vetting, including checks coordinated across several government agencies, these exemptions will only be applied on a case-by-case basis after careful review and all security checks have cleared,” the official added. “This exemption process is vital to advancing the U.S. government’s twin goal of protecting the world’s most vulnerable persons while ensuring U.S. national security and public safety.”

While the administration says the rule change is reasonable, former State Department official and current director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies Jessica Vaughan questioned the administration’s right to unilaterally change the law.

“[T]here is a very legitimate question as to whether the administration actually has the authority to change the law in this way,” Vaughan wrote in an email to TheDC. “It seems to me that they are announcing that they will be disregarding yet another law written by Congress that they don’t like and are replacing it with their own guidelines, which in this case appear to be extremely broad and vague, and which are sure to be exploited by those seeking to game our generous refugee admissions program.”


While Vaughan conceded that there are a number of immigrants seeking protection who have been denied due to unintentional contact with terrorists, she sees the exemptions as likely another opportunity for people to get around the system.

“If the recent past is any guide, those evaluating these cases will be ordered to ignore red flags in the applications, especially if the applicant is supported by one of the many advocacy groups that have the ear of senior DHS staff,” she explained. “The administration already approves of the admission of gang members as asylees and criminals in the DACA program and grants of prosecutorial discretion, so I don’t expect them to be troubled by the admission of terrorists and garden variety fraudsters in our refugee program.  This is how we end up with families like the Tsarnaev brothers [the Boston marathon bombers], who were originally admitted for political asylum.”

On the other side of the spectrum, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy cheered the changes to that law passed by Congress following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.


There are the types of asylum or refugee status seekers who would have been previously barred from entering the U.S., according to DHS include:

1) Individuals who provided small or inconsequential amounts of support without an intent to further any terrorist or violent activities, such as a refugee who gave a bowl of rice to a member of an opposition group.

2) Individuals who, in the ordinary course of business transactions or social or family interactions, have incidentally provided support with no intent of abetting violent or terrorist activity.  For instance, an owner of a restaurant who serves food to any paying customer, even though he knows some of them are members of an opposition group; or a mother or father who-as any parent would-fed and clothed their young adult child, even when they knew their child is part of a resistance movement.

3) Individuals who have provided certain humanitarian assistance–for example, an aid worker who handed out bottled water and blankets to victims of a natural disaster or those displaced by civil conflict, some of whom happen to be members of an opposition group.

4) Individuals who have provided support under significant pressure that does not quite rise to the level of duress (for which there are already exemptions in place), but that is significant enough that anyone in the same situation would see no reasonable alternative and would do the same.  We have seen, for example, a farmer who regularly pays a toll to a resistance group in order to cross a bridge to take his food to market, or a Syrian refugee who pays an opposition group to gain safe passage out of Syria.

Vaughan pointed out that in some cases, only the word of the individual would be used to make a determination.

“In my experience as a former State Dept. consular official, I know that there are some qualified applicants that get excluded because we cannot be sure if they are truly associated with terrorist or criminal groups, but it is better to err on the side of caution when it comes to national security and public safety,” she explained. “After all, there are usually other resettlement options for these people–they don’t have to come to the U.S., even if that’s what they want.”


Topics: , , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Call me “Captain Obvious”, but this lowering the bar can only mean that our government is intentionally trying to destroy our once-great nation.


    • RisingReich

      To call it insanity marginalizes the true EVIL intent. Insanity means that they aren’t thinking logically. This is NOT the case.

      The policy has been written with purpose, results driven. These are not the acts of the insane, but of those with an insidious agenda of destruction of a once great White Nation.

    • Charles W.

      That is exactly what they are trying to do.

      Apparently all the ‘American’ blacks on the government payroll aren’t destroying it fast enough for The Powers That Be’s liking.

    • Stan D Mute

      Please tell us you’re not just now learning this? With a completely unsecured border to a third world nation, both major political parties working hard to grant citizenship to 30 million criminal aliens, an entire government that has declared it’s good to discriminate against and commit crime against the founding people of the nation, and bankrupting the treasury to send money to every third world hellhole and enemy nation, the only surprise left is why America hasn’t collapsed much sooner. Then again, it “survived” the federal government declaring open war on a third of its people in the mid-1800’s and concomitant shredding of its constitution so apparently it takes a lot to destroy a (formerly) white nation..

  • Tarczan

    It is written so broadly almost any terrorist could be let in. The “bowl of rice” is nonsense.

  • Luca

    And this is the exact reason why the Republicans should not allow any new immigration law. No matter what is written into it, King Obama will simply alter the letter of the law and ignore enforcement clauses to suit his party’s agenda. And then he and his ilk will laugh at how monumentally stupid and gullible the Republican party has become.

    • IstvanIN

      he and his ilk will laugh at how monumentally stupid and gullible the Republican party has become.
      ….and at the (real) Americans.

    • Stan D Mute

      Obama has no beef with the Republican Party. His only problems are with Fox News, Talk Radio, and the Tea Party.

  • Truthseeker

    No one in the world who is not a U.S. citizen has any inherent right to be in the U.S. Not a single one. Don’t let any of these people in. The risks are too great.

    • RisingReich

      Who are you talking to? Us on here?
      No one NO ONE else (especially in Washington) cares nor are they listening.

      • Diana Moon Glampers

        Sometimes your truths make me need a drink or six.

        • RisingReich

          I hear that. I’ve had a rather ‘colorful’ journey along the way.

          All of us are a product of genes, environment, and experience. Hopefully people start to understand me better…

    • So CAL Snowman

      Everyone in the world is a U.S. citizen, they’re just not here yet.

      • Stan D Mute

        Or they’re here and just “undocumented”.

      • Einsatzgrenadier

        According to multicultural ideologues, America is for everyone. But this is sheer lunacy. You don’t flood your country with third world immigrants in an already overpopulated world.

        • Jotun Hunter

          the extrenely obvious concept that the 3rd world is the 3rd world because it is full of 3rd world people – and that these places have been virtually unchanged throughout recorded history, is an unutterable thoughtcrime in todays engineered liberal democratic world. Obviousness is comfortingly explained away with lengthy and hard to believe suggestions so that the core lrinciple modernism, non judgementalism, continues to prevail — until such time as nature, red in tooth and claw, makes realities inherent inequalities physically apparent to those weakened by this luxurious lie

  • NoMosqueHere

    3) Individuals who have provided certain humanitarian assistance–for example, an aid worker who handed out bottled water and blankets to victims of a natural disaster or those displaced by civil conflict, some of whom happen to be members of an opposition group.

    In other words, aiders and abettors of Al Qaeda murderers are welcome in the US. I don’t know what it will take, but americans, like babes in the woods, are poised to learn some tough lessons.

    • NeanderthalDNA

      Hey, as long as they’re brown and hate White western civilization, Obama is their buddy.

    • Stan D Mute

      “Poised to learn some tough lessons”? Really?

      If Americans are too stupid to learn, after 150 years of being robbed, assaulted, raped, and murdered by free Africans; too stupid to learn after 3,000+ murdered in our largest city by Arabs; too stupid to learn after being economically destroyed by China; too stupid to learn after endless spying by Russia, Israel, and China; just exactly WHAT do you think WILL make Americans learn?

  • Dave4088

    Sounds like another scheme to further destabilize America and fast track the inflow of third world people who will vote Democrat.

    • Gerónimo Anónimo

      And who along with the Afros, will vote multiple times in the same election.

  • bigone4u

    Obama is a traitor who clearly has violated his Constitutional oath of office. His hatred of this country, learned in Indonesia, Kenya, and in Hawaii from his Communist grandparents and Negro Communist Frank Davis was learned as a child and is part of his DNA.

    This single act by his administration proves that the safety of the people is of no concern. In fact, by making us less safe Obama can more easily take Draconian actions of dictatorship. We are no longer a nation of LAWS, but a nation of ONE MAN. Don’t fool yourself into thinking otherwise. Be prepared to live as a slave or die as a free man. That’s the choice, and it’s not a good one.

    • Stan D Mute

      And John Boner learned his hatred for America in Columbus Ohio. So what?

      Have we really been free since everyone’s favorite Repugnantcon Abe Lincoln declared open war on free white Americans south of the Mason Dixon? The constitution was shredded then and never restored. Hundreds of thousands of free white Americans were murdered by their government. Have things improved? We were tricked into two world wars, tricked into wars in Asia, had our labor stolen and given to places like Zimbabwe, Israel, Pakistan, etc, and we’ve been set upon by feral alien criminals for 150 years now. What’s changed?

      • bigone4u

        The one thing that’s changed is that the powers that be are open about advocating our destruction. In the past, the need for secrecy kept things moving slower. Now the pace is up and accelerating.

    • itdoesnotmatter

      What do we expect of an America hating, red diaper “leader” who held his hands over his crotch as the National Anthem was played, kowtowed to a Shiek, admitted via Freudian slip during an interview, “my muslim religion,” whose records are sealed, who was mentored by communists from the cradle and onward, admitted enmity for this imperialistic, capitalistic, country in his books?

  • dd121

    I’m sure by now, 6 pm in Denver, the Republicans have filed articles of impeachment against the Kenyan horror. Oh, never mind.

    • evilsandmich

      Illegal alien Muslims caused 9/11; so the party in charge at the time sought to rectify the situation by…having more legal Muslim immigrants; brilliant!

  • 2eRep

    This must serve as call to arms to WN patriots.

  • dave

    Obama should be arrested and charged with treason. If we had a Republican party that stood for anything,this traitor would be stopped. The Republicans are digging their own graves by doing nothing.

  • Spartacus

    But you still molest everybody who gets on a plane ? Anarcho-tyranny at it’s best…

  • Greg Thomas

    I am now convinced DHS was created to aid and abet illegal invaders and terrorists. Who
    could blame me for such a conclusion when every appointed DHS secretary since inception, has been cheerleading for amnesty and those who with us harm?

  • Frank_DeScushin

    The Obama admin gives the benefit of the doubt to immigrants with limited terror contact. An extension of the Obama administration, the DOJ, gives absolutely no benefit of the doubt to American companies whose business practices lead to a disparate impact. Those American businesses are presumed to be acting in a racist manner and are promptly sued even if there was no racist intent. Who the Obama administration is willing to extend the benefit of the doubt to and to whom they will not extend that benefit speaks volumes.

  • So, in other words, as long as the muslim didn’t personally make the bomb and plant it under a car, he or she can enter the country, right? Well then, I guess all those muslims
    who only purchased the bomb-making materials, harbored terrorists, and provided funding for them are in the clear. Welcome to America!

    • Jotun Hunter

      why let a single one of them in terror connection or otherwise? is there some desperate need to fill our communities with stone age cultural aliens of a low iq racial variety?

  • Guest

    Obama’s sons

  • r j p

    So is Obama holding the sign in the airport that says “Al Queda”?

  • Peter Connor

    Be prepared

  • Charles W.

    I’ve posted this several times before, but I’ll post it again:

    1) I personally know an attorney who handled an asylum case for a Sudanese illegal. He had zero documentary evidence to show his case; not even a birth certificate. The only ‘evidence’ he had was another Sudanese who vouched that ‘Yeah he from dat tribe.’ Asylum was granted.

    2) I personally spoke with an asylum officer once who told me that 90% of the applicants’ stories are obviously fake, but if they stick with the same story all the way til the end, official policy is that asylum is granted.

    • evilsandmich

      I think that Derb had commented on that once, that getting deported actually takes a bit of effort.

  • MekongDelta69

    How many White people have been allowed into America since 1965? I think I may have spotted two. I’m gonna go look for them.

    I’l be right back…

  • MBlanc46

    He said he was going to do it, so we shouldn’t be surprised that he’s doing it.

  • CompassionateConservative

    The only Muslims we should let into America are the ones who have not yet detonated their suicide vests… The rest are natural Republicans.

  • BobWhitakerisokay

    Judging from 9/11, Fort Hood, the Boston bombing they have historically allowed not a few “insignificants” to slip through the cracks. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Third world immigration is destroying White countries and ONLY White countries. Dept. of Homeland Security, absolutely Orwellian title.

  • Whirlwinder

    Not only cancel these changes but export all Muslims out of the country. Islam’s stated goal is global dominance. The EU is practically gone and America is allowing Muslims to infiltrate into the country at alarming rates. The Muslim-in-Chief is allowing them top spots in our government. This is the enemy folks. Wake up!

  • Pro_Whitey

    I think this is the rule that lets Huma Abedin get in and out of the U.S. Or is she free to cavort with her terrorist relatives because she is now a citizen?

  • Brian

    This exemption process is vital to advancing the U.S. government’s twin
    goal of protecting the world’s most vulnerable persons while ensuring
    U.S. national security and public safety.”
    Funny…I don’t recall voting on this to be our goal. But I do recall something about general welfare and a more perfect union…’for ourselves and our posterity’.

  • John K

    Well, you know, because there aren’t enough illegal alien gangbangers or black thugs to terrorize Americans…..