Like most public policy issues, immigration is difficult to understand. The issue has complex effects on American society and the world at large. Take a quiz on immigration trends to see how well you understand the issue.
Tomorrow the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Espinoza v. Montana, a case addressing state constitutional provisions that bar public funds from going to religious institutions, especially schools. There are many reasons the U.S. Supreme Court should rule in favor of school choice, but the most important is that the end that Blaine amendments are supposed to achieve — keeping government out of religion — is far better served by the measure Montana struck down than maintaining a public school monopoly over taxpayer funds.
In weighing the advantages of the Fed’s floor system compared to those of a “corridor system,” Fed officials haven’t just put their thumbs on the floor‐system scale by exaggerating its merits. They’ve also exaggerated the drawbacks of a corridor system.
Over the last two weeks, the Trump administration has offered a farrago of conflicting accounts and zero evidence for the claim that the assassination of Iranian General Qassim Suleimani was ordered to avert imminent attacks.
We should all be thankful for the court’s avowed restraint — for much of this controversy, judges in the circuit seemingly champed at the bit to take on central planning of the American economy. A big assist is due the Supreme Court, which bench‐slapped some sense into the Ninth Circuit.
Market‐sharing managed trade arrangements are a bad way to approach trade agreements, but even putting that aside, there is still the question of whether they work. It will be interesting to see how the U.S. strategy is effective here.