Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- 50% of all American unicorns were started by immigrants. This is sheer stupidity to prevent the best of what the world has to offer when they are knocking at your door.by dyauspitr
- And now they can be more evenly distributed all over the world. I'd call it a net win even if administration did not think it this way.by geodel
- The world's richest man is an illegal immigrant who started multiple companies.
(Musk started X.com while on a student visa and didn't get around to securing a work visa until many years later. This rule violation technically renders his U.S. citizenship void under Trump-era immigration rules.)
by gamblor956 - It’s unquestionably bad for the United States, but it will be good for the rest of the world. Time for US dominance to end, and Trump is doing a good job of that.by antonvs
- The "great man" theory has been (rightfully) banished from most public discourse, the only remaining holdout is startups. The whole point of VC firms is that startups have no chance of success without backing. Often times the founders don't put in the work beyond the prototype (and what a minimal prototype it can be), their VC partners stock them with top-tier employees who build the thing, the founders are young figureheads/mascots who "sell" the startup perception. Often times the founders don't even come up with the idea, they are gifted an idea by a VC partner, you see this when startups "pivot" to something completely different.by phendrenad2
- The impact on academics and research has already been felt over the last decade. US used to be the default destination for academics and skilled workers from China ever since the cultural revolution. They engrained themselves in the country, studied/worked at top univerities, taught multiple generations of students, did key research, worked at top tech companies, and overall were major contributors to American technological superiority.
Then starting ~2016 Trump and his DoJ made it borderline impossible for Chinese nationals to get visas, specifically targeting research universities. Since then new Chinese skilled immigration has slowed down to a trickle, and there has been a massive "brain gain" of existing talent in China's favor.
The result - China now has a booming tech industry, Chinese universities have overlapped Amercian ones in research output, China is a very close 2nd in the AI race. And as skilled immigrants continue to be driven out of the US China in particular will enjoy the benefits.
by paxys - People think immigrants come to just take. When they can contribute to the economy.by Synaesthesia
- Not just immigration, seems like travel in general is becoming difficult too.
It's a real shame that just when we have the tech and infrastructure to allow people to travel anywhere in the world within a day, for a single person to be able to explore the entirety of this awesome planet for the first time in human history,
that the worst among us have to enforce artificial borders and deny everyone this basic freedom.
Travel should be codified as a human right.
If someone can support themselves and doesn't harm anybody, what ethical justification does anybody have for denying a person from living where they want?
by Razengan - > to enforce artificial borders and deny everyone this basic freedom.
a very postnational view, humanist in a way, lipsius or erasmus would recognize it.
that sort of individuated cosmopolitanism only works for educated men and women with means, who have or have the capacity to self-actualize.
not for the masses. the nation is still a cradle to protect and nurture the commonwealth, and given that they took hundreds to sometimes thousands of years to form, i don't think borders are artificial in the least.
by trgn - People aren't simply interchangeable units of economic output, and when they live together for long periods of time they develop unique and distinct cultures that are dear to them. Letting the entirety of the world into your country without stops is cultural suicide. If you put any a value in preserving culture you will find it ethical to put some limit on immigration. Assimilation is possible but there is a limit to the rate and amount of foreigners a place can absorb before changing significantly.by green_wheel
- Some of the comments are talking about H1-B which isn't impacted by this.
Vivek Wadhwa, one of the staunchest supporters of H1B (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12489558) is now recommending to end it: https://x.com/wadhwa/status/2090958079726927873
- H1B makes no sense anymore when the conversation is how many jobs will survive AI.by dudul
- Yea, he sensed the heat that H1-B scab labor is getting now that the economy is in a downturn and AI is poised to take out a lot of high-tech white collar jobs. He wants to nominally end H1-B but really just wants to shift attention away from what these non-immigrant visas are doing to the people they are designed to replace.
> These visas played a very important role in making America the world leader in technology and innovation.
Citation needed -- it's as if we didn't have major technological advancements and a burgeoning tech industry in the valley before 1990 when the H1-B was signed into law and companies rushed to force Americans to train their (unbeknownst to them) replacements.
> But the system became badly corrupted. Unethical body shops learned to game it.
Who corrupted it? Certainly Vivek and his compatriots have some culpability here. I'm sure there are other examples but Cognizant was the most egregious where they were found liable in discriminating against non-Indians when deciding who to put on the bench and who to ultimately terminate.
by profdevloper - This is a response to the supreme court ruling on birthright citizenship. They're using the levers they do have, since that was removed. Anyone who agrees with the ruling should really read justice Thomas' dissent.by eluusive
- What is this "lever" you claim already existed and then got "removed", precisely?by Terr_
- No one should be subjected to a Thomas dissent. Especially that one.by cosmicgadget
- No, it's not. This seems to be Stephen Miller's baby and the efforts to limit legal immigration (see my other comment) predate the birthright citizenship case and pretty much started day 1 of the administration. Birthright citizenship is really part of that.by jmyeet
- it’s a cut and dry constitutional amendment, it doesn’t matter if Thomas thinks the people that were in mind when it was drafted are not the same people it applies to now. if they want to change it, go ahead and get the states to ratify a new amendment.
Supreme Court doesn’t get to throw out an amendment because it’s old.
by samiwami - It is only a matter of time before this administration does this to green card applications and renewals too. A permanent green card is not permanent. It needs to be renewed every 10 years. I am also worried about policies eventually directed at naturalized citizens. I sincerely hope I am wrong.by cogogo
- If you read the article, that time is now. Green card interviews are part of the immigrant visa applications that have been paused indefinitely.
- This ‘pause’ IS for green card applicants (immigrant visa)by webo
- > I am also worried about policies eventually directed at naturalized citizens.
There is no eventually about it. This administration has a quota for revoking naturalized citizens' status set hugely higher than the historical level of cases. Given the quota they will just ignore justice and revoke the status of those least able to defend themselves, like they have with other immigrants.
by nutjob2 - This is incorrect. The physical card itself expires every 10 years, but your status as a permanent resident doesn't. That can only be revoked by a legal process.
Obviously if you do not renew the green card itself, you are going to face practical issues, because you have no easy way to prove your permanent resident status. So things like employment verification because of new employment and entering the country from abroad will become quite a bit more difficult.
by gorbachev - I wonder if this has to do with the current economy and job market. Anecdotally I have found it very tough to find a new job (software engineering), though my previous employer continues to post job listings for green card applications as part of the required labor market test.
- Are you... genuinely this naive and ignorant to what's happening in USA?by izacus
- Stop it you’re not allowed to talk about thatby horns4lyfe
- I'd say it's on the Trump administration being full of racists and white nationalists and wanting to deport immigrants.
Why do you wonder if it's economic instead of the Trump administration's announced policies of stopping immigration, including unconstitutionally removing birthright citizenship?
by miltonlost - Doubtful. Most consular green card applications are for family based immigration. This pause is also for final interviews for visas that are basically approved already. Labor market test already happened a while ago if relevant.
Employment based green cards are mostly granted inside the U.S. via adjustment of status without state dept involvement.
by yesb - They certainly aren’t doing this out of any particular love for American workers.by stanleykm
- They are not connected - this is a pause on immigrant visas, not work visas.by root_axis