The federalists gave him the opportunity to come back to the country, to take power, and to defend Mexico. Since Santa Anna was not really committed to either side of politics, his alliance with the federalists was just so he would be allowed to return to power. It was possible for Santa Anna to change his political views from one group to the other as long as the group could guarantee that he would be in power because that is all that he wanted. Santa Anna repealed the Mexican Constitution, which eventually led to the beginning of the Texas Revolution. Santa Anna 's reasoning for the repeal was that American settlers in Texas were not paying taxes or tariffs, the Texans were claiming they were not recipients of any of the services provided by the Mexican Government.
However, Santa Anna did grant the request that Immigration be legalized from the United States, which had been banned in the Law of April 6, 1830, which had upset many Texans. He also removed some customs duties, but increased them in January of 1835. So while he did employ some of the changes that Texans wanted, he failed to cease the growing dissent Texas had for Mexico. One of the slightly more minor reasons the Texas Revolution happened was because of Mexico’s policy on immigration. The Law of April 6, 1830 made it illegal for anyone from the United States to immigrate to Texas.
Before Jefferson entered the presidential office he was a states rights supporter and when the tax on whiskey was placed he opposed it, saying “The first error was to admit it by the Constitution.” (Doc A). He didn’t like the constitution because of the fact that it would make central government stronger. When the alien act was passed he was opposed to it and said that the central government should only have a set of specific purposes and the leftover purposes should be left to the states individually. (Doc B) Determining the amount of time it takes to be a citizen, and the ability to jail people opposing the government was too much power to Jefferson. When he came into office he realized the necessity for more central power and took more matters into his own hands, he had become a loose constructionist.
However, to side with the Americans would mean disregarding the blatant disrespect displayed by the settlers, the betrayal of the American government for the annexation of what was still viewed as Mexican land, and the ambiguity of the border dispute for both. To review the facts behind the actions of the war reveal Mexico to be slightly less guilty, with a stronger basis to support their participation in the Mexican-American
People may believe that they were not justified because the US had already stolen Texas from Mexico. “From Mexico’s point of view, the annexation of Texas to the United States was inadmissible for both legal and security reasons.” (Document C) Clearly, America was not justified in declaring war against Mexico because they had already robbed them, and was not right to declare war after they were just robbed of their land. However, America was justified because Mexico would lose their land eventually anyways, and while Mexico was weak, seized the opportunity to gain more land. Thus, America was justified to fight against
Parker’s article is opposite of Rodriguez’s. She believes illegal immigrants have no right to complain or demonstrate for their rights. In this article, Parker uses a few more facts than Rodriguez but it still appears to be based mostly on her personal opinion. Parker states that “the recent pro-immigration demonstrations around the country have been a major turnoff.” Demonstrations made in Spanish are not convincing to her. Furthermore, Parker believes that the claims made by the demonstrators are “bogus claims draped in the garb of the civil-rights movement”.
I don’t agree with one sole person having power over this country but I also do not agree with congress making the decisions in a time of crisis. I would propose having a cabinet that the american people choose to overlook the president for foreign matters and crisis. Arguably, we have that concept and it’s
Building the border wall has been a big issue going on around the United States, although it is mostly the states that meet with Mexico. The reason why the wall was built along Mexico and the United States border was because they thought this was going to prevent illegal crossings from Mexico into the United States, and so drug trafficking could be stopped. The outcome of the border wall turned out to be a problem for several people living around the border, for others the border wall seemed to be the great thing. People thought this wall was going to protect Americans, and the border was going to be more secure. Unfortunately, the border wall did not help as much like Americans thought it would.
Yet, with the little progress they’ve made in the six months they were given, I’m doubtful. Even though President Trump is opposed to the McCain-Coons plan, I believe that it is reasonable for both Dreamers and border security. It doesn’t solve every immigration issue, but it takes care of the two most urgent problems and serves as a good foundation. Like many lawmakers, I am not in support of a border wall, and I think that the large sum of money required for a wall could be used to improve border security in better, more technologically advanced ways. Although border security is important, it is more important that Dreamers are able to stay in the United States and have the chance to earn citizenship.