This item (was) buried in a (Trump Administration) Memorandum to several heads of departments…
Sec. 3. Enforcement of All Laws for Entry into the United States. I direct the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of all other relevant executive departments and agencies (as identified by the Secretary of Homeland Security) to rigorously enforce all existing grounds of inadmissibility and to ensure subsequent compliance with related laws after admission. The heads of all relevant executive departments and agencies shall issue new rules, regulations, or guidance (collectively, rules), as appropriate, to enforce laws relating to such grounds of inadmissibility and subsequent compliance. To the extent that the Secretary of Homeland Security issues such new rules, the heads of all other relevant executive departments and agencies shall, as necessary and appropriate, issue new rules that conform to them. Such new rules shall supersede any previous rules to the extent of any conflict.
Here is what is problematic with this. Sure, current laws can be rigorously enforced. But that is just campaign talk, Current laws are always enforced to the same standard extent to which they are written by those working day in and day out. Although we may like not to have tough laws enforced, we understand that IF they are in place, the legal system recognizes their right to be used (as long as such is Constitutional).
But focus on this part of the above quote:
“The heads of all relevant executive departments and agencies shall issue new rules, regulations, or guidance (collectively, rules), as appropriate, to enforce laws relating to such grounds of inadmissibility and subsequent compliance. To the extent that the Secretary of Homeland Security issues such new rules, the heads of all other relevant executive departments and agencies shall, as necessary and appropriate, issue new rules that conform to them. Such new rules shall supersede any previous rules to the extent of any conflict.”
Let’s walk through this… New rules will be issued by the heads of the departments. They can be capricious, random, or prejudicial. They can be made up on the spot; there is no way to know. For example based on some stories already told, you can be forced to present your phone with password. .. or… you will be body cavity searched, … or… you can be held indefinitely without further notice.
As with any law change or new power grab, in the hands of good people they can be tolerated if they are only used on known criminals. But in the hands of bad, they can destroy a nation through their random use..
Essentially this single clause should be considered an enabling act, one wide open which as with that of Hitler, simply says that all rules will now be made solely by X and must be carried out exactly as X says.