DHS Policy Change on Deportations

[jimzinsocal]

Weve all read the various media reports concerning this from yesterday. And certainly the reactions from all sides of the issue.
I spent the better part of the day doing research because some stuff was unclear or seemed incorrect somehow.
The folks were talking about are Dream Act Eligable folks who find themselves in this country without documentation. Folks that presumably entered the US with parent(s) and without proper authorization. What we call illegal aliens.
First off? Was this a deliberate pander by Obama? Of course it was. The election is coming in November so lets not pretend politics doesnt matter.
No doubt this makes Obama more attractive to thousands of Hispanic voters and other new immigrants...illegal or otherwise. The perception will no doubt be: He cares about us!
Fair enough. Ill get back to thoughts about the Dream Act later.

The big discussion yesterday and today centered on Obama's method.
We read "overreach"..."fiat" and I called him a Pharoah.
The media referred to his action as an Executive Order.

Please show me the Executive Order. I dont see it here:


http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-r...ecutive-orders

Rather what I do find is a policy change made by DHS


www.dhs.gov/files/enforcement/deferred-action-process-for-young-people-who-are-low-enforcement-priorities.shtm

Read all that linked and focus on these parts:

Does this Administration remain committed to comprehensive immigration reform?
Yes. The Administration has consistently pressed for passage of comprehensive immigration reform, including the DREAM Act, because the President believes these steps are critical to building a 21st century immigration system that meets our nation’s economic and security needs.
Is passage of the DREAM Act still necessary in light of the new process?
Yes. As the President has stated, individuals who would qualify for the DREAM Act deserve certainty about their status, and this new process does not provide that certainty. Only the Congress, acting through its legislative authority, can confer the certainty that comes with a pathway to permanent lawful status.

Having read all that? My thinking has changed somewhat.
My thinking has me wondering why exactly Republican members of the Senate have basically given..via inaction, the talking point and political advantage to Obama? The Dream Act sits tied up in the Senate and Obama walks away with the narrative.
Thats what bugs me the most.
We can go on and on about the perception that Obama rewrote law..but really to what end? Are we suggesting various government agencies can no longer put priorities on what cases become a focus?
I can make the case that Obama more or less sets priorities for the Justice Department so how is this different?

My irritation is better focused on the Senators that have done Republicans no favor by stalling the legislation.

But dont misunderstand. I still think Obama is an arrogant Pharoah but hey...hes done exactly what a politician does in this case. Taken credit for an issue that wasnt part of the campaign...but now is.

[jimzinsocal]

Add to all that. The 800,000 number seems really difficult to substiantiate. The earliest reference I can find came from these folks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congres...ispanic_Caucus

It was an estimate in response to the elevated deportations that had happened during Obama's Presidency expressing fears...back in 2010, that this many folks might be deported by election time in 2012. Again, it was a guesstimate from those folks and represents the entire deported group..of which Dream Act Eligable young people are a subset.

And BTW...I havent turned into a Democrat. I have found the reporting of this latest issue sensationalized and inaccurate is all.

Im also looking down the road and wondering how the Republican Party will still exist in 20 years or 30 years.
The fact is by 2050 studies suggest immigrants will have represented 80% of the population growth from now till then. White voters will be a minority.
So it seems logical to me as a Republican voter, to accept that reality and dial in my perception around immigration.
From what I read about the Dream Act, its a method of resolving the citizenship issue for a portion of folks that had entered the country illegally.
I think its a fair start at legitimizing the least harmful subset of that group.
Again...young people that find themselves here in the US because they were brought here by illegal entering parents.
For me, not legitimizing these folks over time..a suggested 13 year road to citizenship means Republicans alienating themselves from a large voting group. It also gets at original sin thinking. Are we really in a position to think or demonstrate these folks should be forever considered "less than" by virtue of actions of their parents?

Also I saw Fluff's example about the job impact. I agree that job impact has to be considered with all immigration. All groups and all countries of origin.
Perhaps thru this recent policy change well get a better handle on exactly how many folks are here illegally and what they are doing for work at present.

Finally, was Obama's action Unconstitutional?
Is restating DHS policy change unconstitutional?
I dont know really.
Is it unconstitutional for IRS to prioritize who it audits?
We can see both sides emerging on this.
In any event seeking Congressional input would have been a better road.

[Dutchcedar]

In any event seeking Congressional input would have been a better road.

That only holds if the decision is not purely political for the sole benefit of Obambi's re-election campaign, which it clearly is.

But like many desperate moves, it will likely backfire. As a daily follower of Rassy's presidential tracking poll, I can report that since this came down, so have Obambi's polling numbers.

[IAmGhostDog]

In any event seeking Congressional input would have been a better road.

Surely you jest.
The grid lock the Congress has become.
The partisanship that has poisoned the hill.
The president did the right thing.

[bk94si]

I am not completely opposed to this but first the border has to be sealed before we even have this conversation. Also, I think it is a loser with the high unemployment we have. He may gain some Hispanic voters but I think they are the ones who would vote for him anyway. I think that he stand a greater risk of alienating some voters who might otherwise be for him, like inner city unemployed who might see this a further competition for jobs.

[jimzinsocal]

More related stuff and again Im not defending the DHS rule change particularly but rather understand the setting that the rule change evolved.

Weve all read all sorts of reporting thru yesterday talking about lawless changes and constitutional shredding.
Believe me I understand the principle involved. Its never desireable to avoid enforcing law as written particularly coming from the branch of government designed to enforce law. Thats what the Executive Branch does: Executes Law.
A also believe different agencies of government can and do make the ultimate choice around enforcement priorities. Is setting a new/changed priority always the same as shirking constitutional obligation?
Id have to say sometimes yes...sometimes no.

In my research I discovered another "policy change" concerning immigration status etc. I dont recall any mention let alone uproar.
You tell me. How is this different than the recent policy change in basic form.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012.../2012-7698.htm

Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers of Inadmissibility for
Certain Immediate Relatives

My point is that apparently DHS enjoys a degree of flexability with how law is enforced.

[Bearded Frog]

The current Immigration system is beyond broken and retarded. If somehow you're not convinced that the gov't is ridiculously bureaucratic then watch someone try to become a legal US citizen.

Someone who wants to do it the right way has to spend a shitload of money on lawyers and the gov't itself, filling out mile high stacks of paperwork, waiting on them to actually do shit, and then still having a chance of being sent back.

Someone who wants to do it the wrong way, climbs a fence and is immediatelly welcomed with open arms (I know its not that simple but it is STILL simpler).

Stuff like this just continues to make it worse because they still punish the people doing it the right way and reward the people doing it the wrong way. Although we've headed that way in other directions (punish the rich, reward the poor/lazy, everybuddy wins etc).

My wife is from England and even though its supposed to be the easy way of doing it legally (marrying US citizen), it is anything but easy. Very expensive, very complicated, and she could still be sent back. Not to mention if we hadnt hired an expensive lawyer it would have went tits up in the first few days.

[Dutchcedar]

^^^ That's a side of it many people simply don't know about.

Heck, they made us live in Canada for two freakin' years before immigrating here... something about too many people coming from Holland around that time.

All that aside, I'm amazed that so many people see this as anything but temporary pandering to get votes... just like that gay marriage evolution bullcrap. I'm thinking this was all about shutting down Marco Rubio's legislation... another short term "point score".

[madhatter256]

Textbook example of political pandering and the congress is eating up the bulls*.

This announcement also came out AFTER (in terms of news events) Florida filed a lawsuit against DHS (I may have this backwards - someone is suing the other) so that FL can get a hold of records to purge people from voting rolls because illegals ARE on the voting rolls since they all select "yes" at the DMV for voter registration. I love runon sentences lol.

[jimzinsocal]

I see Republicans are rolling out a new piece of legislation to counter the new policy. Seems to me the simple way...correct way to stop the policy.

[tucker]

Gridlock in congress is far, far from being something new. It’s not supposed to be easy to pass controversial legislation that’s why the founders created 3 co-equal branches. If you want a king or a dictator vote for one.

Oh wait! The dumbed down and indoctrinated already did that.

To hell with the law, the constitution and a representative form of government…

What Obama did is strictly political it has nothing to do with his phony love and phony concern for illegal Mexicans. When the right time comes they go under the bus just like everybody else.

[myv65]

If Obama had made this move during his first year, heck even his second year in office, I would look at it from an entirely different perspective. Locally our school district is flush with students learning English, and only a fool believes they're all legally residing in the US. It's not an issue I've thought through completely, but off the cuff I can see some pretty rigid conditions that permit a pathway for kids like this to become citizens.

IMHO, the timing makes this nothing more than a ploy. Oh I think Obama's sincere in what he says, but I don't think he feels any differently now than he did last time he ran for the job. It's just time for another arrow out of the quiver in his never-ending attempt to distract from his abysmal economic record, foreign relations fiascos, etc, etc.

And to be fair, Congress has dragged their feet on this for eons, and left the door wide open for Obama to make this latest little move. Hard to put too much blame on a politician for taking advantage. It is, after all, what politicians do best.

[tucker]

Until the border is sealed I won’t consider a pathway to citizenship for any illegal. Not even the heart wrenching poor kids line of BS will change that.

It’s just an invitation for more illegals’ to enter the country.

[kbohip]

Until the border is sealed I won’t consider a pathway to citizenship for any illegal. Not even the heart wrenching poor kids line of BS will change that.

It’s just an invitation for more illegals’ to enter the country.

Exactly!

[jimzinsocal]

Fred Thompson writes about the lack of executive order etc with Obama's policy change

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-fred-thompson