The Heritage Foundation has published regular iterations of its “Mandate for Leadership” (hereafter referred to as the “Mandate”) for over 40 years, each detailing its recommendations and plans for the next Republican administration.2 The Foundation boasts a significant success rate: the Trump admin- istration implemented nearly 64 percent of its recommendations within the first year.3 The latest. [...] In the interim, it instructs the Secretary of Homeland Security not to issue any updates to the list of H-2 eligible countries.8 Though the program is enshrined in statute, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in consul- tation with the Department of State (DOS), maintains the authority to publish an eligible countries list in the Federal Register, defining which countries’ nationals are eli. [...] The Mandate aims to disrupt this balance and to allow the White House to assert additional control over the day-to-day operations of federal agencies by directing DHS and DOS to hire more political appointees and to redistribute career personnel to bolster political decision-making.99 The Mandate argues that the Office of the Secretary of Homeland Security must have its own designated team of poli. [...] The Mandate suggests that despite the statutory authorization for programs like the diversity visa and the student visa, the execu- tive would have the authority to evaluate its visa programs to ensure they align with the administration’s objectives.101 If open to evaluation, these programs could also be subject to termination or modification based on White House priorities and resource availabili. [...] Similarly, the Mandate would direct the next administration to issue an executive order extending the President’s authority in Section 212(f) of the INA to the Secretary of Homeland Security.103 This would allow the Secretary to suspend the entry of certain foreign nationals if deemed necessary to prevent or curtail an actual or anticipated mass migration.104 Under the Mandate, the executive order.
Related Organizations
- Pages
- 17
- Published in
- United States of America
Table of Contents
- Key takeaways 1
- Cutting off legal immigration 2
- Functional limitations to legal immigration 3
- Undermining humanitarian relief 6
- Manufacturing inefficiencies to create backlogs and cut off applications 7
- Immediate removals of rejected visa applicants and beneficiaries 9
- Limiting Americans access to student aid 10
- Centralizing power in a hyper-politicized federal government 11
- Limiting state and local authority 11
- Politicizing the federal government 13
- Limiting Congressional and judicial checks and balances 14
- Decimating privacy protections 15
- An obsession at a cost 17