Immigration Restriction League Outlines and Congressional Testimony about Admitting Jewish Refugee Children in 1939 The first document is the declaration of the Immigration Restriction League’s position. It was an organization that has focused on issues related to migration. Most of the ideas suggested in the outline are incredibly questionable, but some suggestions are reasonable. For instance, possession of money is a crucial factor that should be monitored because it would help to ensure that individuals do not have issues with housing and may find jobs ( Statement of the Immigration Restriction League , 1894, para. 5). Moreover, it would help to prevent crimes and offensive behavior. On the other hand, the way they describe some of the immigrants is unacceptable. The second piece is focused on the perspective of the Congress on the immigration of young Jewish refugees. It is suggested that they should be accepted because it will not damage the economy in the long-term, and is an ethical decision. However, it was hard to reach a consensus on this subject matter because some policymakers believed that such aspects as religion also should not be overlooked, and could affect the process of immigration ( Wagner-Rogers refugee bill backed at Hearing, 1939 , para. 7). It is possible to state that there is a similarity between these two works because both of them suggest that particular limitations must be introduced. It is imperative to mention that they are focused on different age groups, and individuals that are younger than sixteen would not have to face such barriers as literacy tests when moving to the U.S. The fact that they could be denied entry because of particular ratios and their religion is quite problematic. Overall, the analysis of these pieces suggests that the treatment of immigrants varied depending on the circumstances. Sacco-Vanzetti case and Samuel Morse and His Anti-Immigrant Bias The first text highlights the Sacco-Vanzetti case and an incident that has led to many discussions and has been incredibly controversial. It is quite evident that both of them did not want to be deported, and were satisfied with their lives in the United States. However, the primary issue is that some believed that they were unfairly judged, and their guilt has not been proven based on the available evidence (Simkin, 2014, para. 4). The fact that an innocent individual has been punished is worrying and indicates that the judicial system had to be reformed because it was extremely unfair towards non-natives. The second work devotes enormous attention to the history of nativism, and its role in the U.S. It is necessary to mention that the movement has been incredibly successful, and its activities have led to the introduction of numerous policies ( Anti-immigrant and anti-catholic feeling in America , n.d. para. 13). Most of them were quite reasonable, but it became a problem when hatred towards immigrants was enormous. It is possible to state that a particular connection between these two readings is present. First of all, it can be seen that prejudice was quite common at that time. The issue became especially problematic when the United Legal system was involved because there was enormous pressure from both sides. Unfair decisions could affect the relationships with other countries and dam