The article's last paragraph itself explains that the critique stems from the inconsistency of author's core values with Tramp general policy's ones. in this sense it is biased as well as inadequate as an analysis of the subject matter. it, for example, cannot even authentically express the general policy's central term and value; instead of 'America' or 'American nation' as it is used in Tramp's speeches ('America first') he uses the terms like 'all Americans' and 'Americans' as if they carried the same meaning. In other words, he falsifies what Tramp actually is about. To be more exact, consciously or not, he rejects the qualitative distinctness of the phenomenon of the American nation in the wider world (of the nations) and reduces it to numerically counted people Americans as a mere collection of present individuals. This has several 'objective' ideological reasons as well, rooted for example in the current condition of 'modern' social sciences in the leading universities. But personally for me the article has become interesting due to its following characteristic. Perhaps it unintentionally shows up why Trump can be right with his selective approaches to the immigration matters. If even a green card holder 'Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne' fails to see or rejects to accept the American nation as owing qualitative distinctness within the larger world what to expect from other, less educated sheller-seekers, for example, in America? in my view the article does affirm unintendedly that an attitude to the receiving country matters in forming an immigration policy, and policy makers must give to it their due attention.