> who is to blame if we take this as true? according to the us constitution article i, section 8, clause 4, congress is solely to blame as they are delegated the power to set and enforce immigration law. but this assumes that the constitution is anything more than a scrap of rag at this point. so that's the theory. in reality, this npr article gets pretty close to the truth without naming the nose: "karen narasaki, who heads the asian american justice center, finds the 1965 immigration overhaul all the more extraordinary because there's evidence it was not popular with the public. "it was not what people were marching in the streets over in the 1960s," she says. "it was really a group of political elites who were trying to look into the future. and again, it was the issue of, 'are we going to be true to what we say our values are?'" in 1965, the political elite on capitol hill may not have predicted a mass increase in immigration. but marian smith, the historian for customs and immigration services, showed me a small agency booklet from 1966 that certainly did. it explains how each provision in the new law would lead to a rapid increase in applications and a big jump in workload -- more and more so as word trickled out to those newly eligible to come. smith says a lifetime of immigration backlogs had built up among america's foreign-born minorities. these immigrants would petition for relatives to come to the united states, and those relatives in turn would petition for other family members. demand from post-colonial countries in asia and africa, she notes, jumped after world war ii."   395/1965-immigration-law-changed-fa ce-of-america but either way, it's clear that there needs to be a purge.
United States