(GoRealNewsNow.com) – In a remarkable display of unity, nearly every member of the House — all but two — stood together to pass legislation aimed at safeguarding the U.S. from those affiliated with Hamas, particularly in light of the group’s Oct. 7 assault on Israel.
This bill, designed to keep Hamas members and those involved in the attack from entering the U.S., saw overwhelming support, sailing through with a vote of 422-2.
However, the consensus was not absolute. Representatives Cori Bush and Rashida Tlaib, both known for their progressive stances and being members of the “Squad,” cast the lone dissenting votes against the “No Immigration Benefits for Hamas Terrorists Act.”
Tlaib, a Michigan Democrat, vocally criticized the bill, arguing that it was a vehicle for fueling anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian, and anti-Muslim sentiments, thereby endangering communities like hers.
Tlaib’s stance shows a deeper concern with the legislation, labeling it as both unnecessary and redundant.
This perspective aligns with the Democratic leadership’s whip message, which echoed the sentiment that the bill’s provisions were largely duplicative of existing laws. Current U.S. law already prohibits Hamas members from entering the country and receiving immigration benefits due to the group’s designation as a foreign terrorist organization.
Despite this redundancy, the bill goes further, broadening the scope of exclusions to encompass members of the Palestine Liberation Organization and all individuals involved in the Oct. 7 events, irrespective of their formal ties.
The passage of this bill represents a pivotal moment in America’s legislative strategy towards individuals linked to recognized terrorist groups. The fact that the bill garnered widespread support, even from typically progressive Democrats like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, underscores a strong bipartisan commitment to national security.
However, the dissent from Representatives Cori Bush and Rashida Tlaib introduces a notable divergence in views within the Democratic party, shedding light on the ongoing debate between ensuring safety and protecting civil liberties.