National Origin-Based Antidiscrimination for Nonimmigrants Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding and for his leadership. What a busy time in the Committee on the Judiciary, bringing two bills to the floor today, with all the work that went into them under Chairman Nadler's leadership.

Madam Speaker, here we are, under the gaze of our patriarch, George Washington, right there in this Chamber.

Madam Speaker, 230 years ago, our patriarch, George Washington, who watches over us in this Chamber, famously wrote to the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, Rhode Island. In that letter, he made a promise that would be our Nation's guide for centuries to come.

He wrote: All possess ``liberty of conscience. . . . It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights.''

He went on to say: ``For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens.''

Today, by passing the NO BAN Act, the House is upholding that fundamental promise--``to bigotry no sanction''--by taking action to ensure that no President or administration can ever again abuse its authority by waging discrimination on the basis of religion.

Madam Speaker, thank you to Chair Judy Chu of CAPAC, our sponsor of this legislation and a national champion in combating discrimination and xenophobia, who has helped lead the Congress' response to recent anti-AAPI attacks.

The NO BAN Act strengthens the Immigration and Nationality Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion, and it restores the separation of powers by limiting overly broad executive action to issue future religious bans, which are fundamentally un-American.

As Justice Sotomayor wrote, echoing President Washington, in her dissent in the shameful Trump v. Hawaii Supreme Court case upholding the last administration's Muslim ban: ``The United States of America is a Nation built upon the promise of religious liberty. Our Founders honored that core promise by embedding the principle of religious neutrality in the First Amendment. The Court's decision today'' to uphold the Muslim ban ``fails to safeguard that fundamental principle.''

Madam Speaker, I want to mention that when this happened 4 years ago, and the President came and did his Muslim ban legislation, we had a hearing. It wasn't an official hearing because we weren't in the majority, and the majority wasn't interested in having it, but we had a hearing on it.

What we saw in that hearing were leaders of the security community saying that if this stays in place, it is going to hurt our national security because we will not be able to keep promises that we made to those who helped us in Afghanistan and Iraq. We won't be able to because many of them are Muslim.

Madam Speaker, a thousand diplomats from the State Department--and this is highly unusual--signed on in opposition to what this did to us diplomatically in the world. Our rank-and-file men and women spoke directly to the problem that this would create, the danger it created, in people trusting our word when we asked them to help us and that we would help keep them safe.

Madam Speaker, you have heard me quote, and Pramila has heard me quote, again and again in that same hearing because many of the people who come here for asylum and refugee status because of religious persecution where they are from, the National Association of Evangelicals testified the following: ``The United States' refugee resettlement program is the crown jewel of American humanitarianism.'' They were speaking in terms of religious refugees.

Again, we cannot allow any President to abuse the power of his or her office in this regard.

Madam Speaker, if I may, I would like to also address another piece of legislation, and I thank the chairman for bringing it to the floor, the Access to Counsel Act, protecting the civil liberties of those who face prolonged detention as they seek legal entry into the United States. Some of them are little children.

This is a commonsense step to close a serious and dangerous gap in our immigration law that too often prevents the vulnerable from accessing not only legal counsel but also medical attention or contact with their families.

I am always proud to salute Representative Pramila Jayapal, the sponsor of the Access to Counsel Act and a champion for the dignity and rights of all newcomers to our Nation--in fact, everyone in our Nation; and I thank her for her efforts.

Passage of these bills, the NO BAN Act and the Access to Counsel Act, should not be controversial. Over 400 immigrants' rights bills organizations, faith-based organizations, business groups, and civil rights organizations support the NO BAN Act, and many more support the Access to Counsel Act.

These bills are about honoring our Nation's promise that, as President Washington said, we will give ``to bigotry no sanction; to persecution no assistance.''

Madam Speaker, I urge a strong vote for both of these bills honoring the vision of our Founders, and the aspirations of so many people in our country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source