Ted Cruz Vaults Past Donald Trump and Ben Carson in Latest Iowa Polls

Ted Cruz Vaults Past Donald Trump and Ben Carson in Latest Iowa Polls

Actually, Trump is up two points since the previous poll by the Des Moines Register, but what's really happened is this:

Ben Carson is in free-fall. He has lost 15 points.

The undecideds have gone down by 6 points.

Cruz has picked up all of that loss. In fact, he has gained exactly those 21 points! In six weeks he has gone from 10 percent to 31.

The rest of the field has only undergone minor shifting. Fiorina has lost 3, Rand Paul 2, Kasich 1. Those six points have been distributed as follows: Trump and Christie have picked up two apiece, Rubio and Bush 1 apiece.

Note that the nationwide polls are not exhibiting a similar trend. In the only poll (IPSOS/Reuters) conducted since Trump's proposal to ban Muslims, his percentage held steady at 35, precisely the same as it had been before he took that position.

By the way, Trump's proposal may be legal, according to some scholars. "The Supreme Court has never struck down an immigration classification on the basis of race or any other reason, said Temple University immigration expert Peter Spiro."

The key point is that the Constitution's protections are guaranteed to American citizens and are not universally applicable to foreigners, so past bans have never been struck down.

Immigration from China, for example, was banned outright from 1882-1943.

Immigration from Europe and Asia was limited by a set quota from 1924-1965, based on the number of immigrants of that ethnicity already present in the USA, and limited only to those eligible for naturalization. That system basically ended immigration from Asia, and severely limited immigration from Southern Europe and most of Eastern Europe.

Proponents of the 1924 Immigration Act sought to establish a distinct American identity - which consisted of white Christians from Northern Europe and the British Isles. Back in the first wave of mass immigration, prior to 1890, 82% of immigrants came from Northern and Western Europe. By 1920 that number had dropped to 25%, and the Old Guard was alarmed.

Let's face it, the Old Guard is always alarmed. Some of the logic behind immigration controls in the early 20s seems very familiar today! "The Red Scare of 1919–1921 had fueled xenophobic fears of foreign radicals migrating to undermine American values and provoke an uprising like Russia's 1917 Bolshevik Revolution." The severe restriction on Russian immigration may have been aimed at Marxists, but it was also nearly tantamount to a ban of Jews. 75% of the Jewish migration to the USA came from Russia.

At any rate, the rules changed again in 1965. Per Wikipedia: "The Hart-Cellar Act abolished the system of national-origin quotas. By equalizing immigration policies, the act resulted in new immigration from non-European nations. In 1970, 60% of immigrants were from Europe; this decreased to 15% by 2000."

The key factor to realize here is that none of the immigration quotas or outright bans were illegal or unconstitutional. They were the law of the land, and then they were simply supplanted by other laws in time. There is no precedent for a ban specifically based on religion, but neither is there anything to prevent it. Moreover, even if the courts opposed a ban by religion, it would be possible to circumvent any court interference by banning people by country of origin, which has been common in America's past. It would not be difficult to create a list of countries which would effectively encompass the Muslim world, and from which immigration to the USA would not be allowed.

Note that I am not advocating such a position, but simply noting that it seems to be completely legal and constitutional. That does not make it right.