A series of news articles have caught wind on social media, mainly dealing with the Syrian refugee crisis. One awesome aspect of social media is that more people are paying attention to international news and have the ability to share this content with their followers who would otherwise be in the dark. Unfortunately, one common mistake on social media made by a lot of people is posting and re-posting content that has absolutely no credibility. A lot of times, people see something that outrages them and re-post the article without fact-checking or source checking.

For those of you who have posted angry comments attached to an article explaining why America should halt the process of allowing Syrian refugees into our country—think twice. First, let's lead with this—States have no legal authority to refuse entrance of Syrian refugees into their borders. The Harvard Law Record tells us that, "immigration laws are the sole purview of the federal government.” Think back to government class for a minute, now think about the 10th Amendment. Our founding fathers gave reserved rights to the states, all powers that were not granted to the federal government. Immigration laws, in that case, are regulated at a federal level.

Therefore, these governors who claim to build an invisible wall to keep out Syrian refugees are merely making a statement, and have no control of whether or not that actually happens.

For those of you outraged by this constitutional fact, there are a few components of this situation you need to consider.

First, for refugees to gain admittance into another state or country, they must first contact the United Nations High Commission for Refugees according to an NPR article. After contact is made, the UNHCR will determine if the individual(s) have family in other countries and where relocation would work out best. If it is the United States, U.S. officials told NPR, then refugees must go through a vetting process run by the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, as well as the State Department and the Defense and Homeland Security departments.

What does that all mean? Well, imagine being interviewed by someone from the FBI or just another U.S. official from the various departments. The process is lengthy, and after interviews, the departments ensure that the individual's story checks out. Not only do they verify a refugee's story, but they also find out why said person is fleeing their country—and they verify that too. If the story checks out, then, and only then, are they allowed to enter the country.

How long does it take? U.S. officials told NPR that it can take upwards of 18 months to 24 months. In the last two years, the United States has admitted only 1,800 Syrian refugees. Of that number, majority are children and adults over 60. For those of you fearing full-fledged combat fighters from Syria, only 2 percent of those admitted are single males. (Oh, so not every Middle Eastern male is a Syrian refugee? No—not at all)

So why are political leaders attempting to ban the refugees in the first place? Well, James Comey, the United States FBI Director, worries that there are some flaws in the system. Due to the heavy political and overall unrest in Syria, there are not many U.S. Intelligence forces on the ground. In a round about way, U.S. officials fear that there is no good way to create a watch list of potential terrorists in the area without ground forces.

But before you pick back up your pitch forks and loud shouting, take into consideration why these people are fleeing their homes:

Violence. A lot of violence.

According to WorldVision.org, since the Syrian Civil War started, over 240,000 people have been killed. Of that 240,000, 12,000 were children. Innocent lives are being taken in a country because of a collapsed infrastructure. Humanitarian aid groups often times are unable to even reach those suffering, leaving them without adequate food, water, or shelter.

Put down your red and blues hats for a second and just contemplate that. If this happened in America, we'd want someone to help us. We would want somewhere or someone to run to if this was our state of emergency. We are lucky. We don't have to wake up every morning and wonder where our next meal is coming from or if a bullet or knife is going to cut into our flesh. We walk around on college campuses throughout the nation unprotected without a single thought.

Wake up, friends. I'm not arguing that the concern of a terrorist attack in the country isn't a high one, but I am arguing that you cannot turn away people based on an assumption. The vetting process for refugees is rather cumbersome and even if there are flaws, overall the majority of those attempting to come into our country are trying to find safety. Building a wall of "no" around this country is a complete waste of time and energy. No, the system isn't perfect, but dropping it completely would be a disservice to humanity—no matter what political party you cling to.