[3] The National Origins Formula had been established in the 1920s to preserve American homogeneity by promoting immigration from Western and Northern Europe.

[10] In opening entry to the U.S. to immigrants other than Western and Northern Europeans, the Act significantly altered the demographic mix in the country.

[11] The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 created a seven-category preference system that gives priority to relatives and children of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, professionals and other individuals with specialized skills, and refugees.

[14][15] During this time, most of those immigrating to the U.S. were Northern Europeans of Protestant faith and Western Africans who were human trafficked because of American chattel slavery.

According to the Office of the Historian of the U.S. Department of State, the purpose of the 1924 Act was "to preserve the ideal of U.S. homogeneity" by limiting immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe.

[22]In the 1960s, the United States faced both foreign and domestic pressures to change its nation-based formula, which was regarded as a system that discriminated based on an individual's place of birth.

[27] President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the 1965 act into law at the foot of the Statue of Liberty, ending preferences for white immigrants dating to the 18th century.

[14] The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 did not make it fully illegal for the United States government to discriminate against individuals, which included members of the LGBTQ+ community to be prohibited under the legislation.

[5] Following Kennedy's civil rights address in June 1963, he had Robert, who was the United States Attorney General, prepare a draft bill, which was authored by Adam Walinsky, and sent it to the Congress on July 23, 1963.

The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives by Emanuel Celler, who had advocated for such an immigration reform since 1920s, and by Philip Hart in the Senate.

[30] With the support of President Johnson's Administration, Representative Emanuel Celler (D-NY) introduced the Immigration and Nationality bill, H.R.

[7] During the subcommittee's hearing on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee in the Judiciary United States Senate, many came forward to voice their support or opposition to the bill.

[32] On the other hand, many lobbyists and organizations, such as the Daughters of the American Revolution and the Baltimore Anti-Communistic League, came to the hearing to explain their opposition.

The common argument that they used was that if the government allowed more immigrants into the United States, more employment opportunities would be taken away from the American workforce.

[33] These agricultural organizations believed that this act could cause issues for migrant workers to enter the United States.

"[37] Sen. Hiram Fong (R-HI) answered questions concerning the possible change in the United States' cultural pattern by an influx of Asians: Asians represent six-tenths of 1 percent of the population of the United States ... with respect to Japan, we estimate that there will be a total for the first 5 years of some 5,391 ... the people from that part of the world will never reach 1 percent of the population ... Our cultural pattern will never be changed as far as America is concerned.Democratic Rep. Michael A. Feighan (OH-20), along with some other Democrats, insisted that "family unification" should take priority over "employability", on the premise that such a weighting would maintain the existing ethnic profile of the country.

That change in policy instead resulted in chain migration dominating the subsequent patterns of immigration to the United States.

[30] Then the act was pushed to the Senate, where a similar amendment was proposed (possibly creating a cap of 115,000 immigrants annually from the Western Hemisphere), but this was also never passed.

This meant that it eliminated national origin, race, and ancestry as a basis for immigration, making discriminating against obtaining visas illegal.

[13] Previously, immigrants from Western Hemisphere countries needed merely to register themselves as permanent residents with a financial sponsor in the United States to avoid becoming public charges, and were not subject to skills-based requirements.

[13] The provisions of the 1794 Jay Treaty with the United Kingdom still apply, giving freedom of movement to Native Americans born in Canada.

[49][50][51][52][53][54] As per the rules under the Immigration and Nationality Act, U.S. organizations are permitted to employ foreign workers either temporarily or permanently to fulfill certain types of job requirements.

"[1] Secretary of State Dean Rusk and other politicians, including Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), asserted that the bill would not affect the U.S. demographic mix.

[12][58] If the bill and its subsequent immigration waves since had not been passed, it is estimated by Pew Research that the U.S. would have been in 2015: 75% Non-Hispanic White, 14% Black, 8% Hispanic and less than 1% Asian.

In January 2017, President Donald Trump's Executive Order 13769 temporarily halted immigration from seven majority-Muslim nations.

In December 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the full travel ban—now in its third incarnation—to take effect, which excludes people who have a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.

[66] In June 2018, the Supreme Court upheld the travel ban in Trump v. Hawaii, saying that the president's power to secure the country's borders, delegated by Congress over decades of immigration lawmaking, was not undermined by the president's history of arguably incendiary statements about the dangers he said some Muslims pose to the United States.