On the recordMarch 5, 2020
Mr. Speaker, clearly, we will debate that because the Supreme Court has already addressed the constitutionality upholding it, but it has no genesis in religious tests. It has a genesis in the security of this country. Again, if you go look at the nations that are listed in the ban, Chad went and did the things that the Department of Homeland Security said you needed to do to be in compliance, and they got removed from the list. Every other country on that list has also been invited to go and just do basic sharing of information to ensure that the people coming from those countries are not terrorists, are not criminals, are not going to provide a security threat to our Nation. It is a clear test. Every other country in the world already does it. Why does Libya choose not to comply? I don't know, but they haven't. Why does North Korea choose not to comply? I don't know, but they haven't. Like Chad, go and address these deficiencies, and then you can be removed from the list. Chad has already done that. Every other country can. We will debate it, but it does put additional red tape in front of the President that would preclude him in the health arena from responding to the nations that have a threat of the coronavirus, like the President was quickly able to do with China, quickly able to do with Iran. He would not be able to quickly respond in the future under the bill that is proposed. Clearly, we will heavily debate that next week.





