DACA – Will Congress Get it Right?

Posted by Tina

DACA, the pseudo-amnesty program created illegally by former President Obama has been put on the chopping block by President Trump with a six months window for Congress to finally address problems created by lax and problematic immigration policy and enforcement. The question now is whether a seriously dysfunctional Congress can roll up their collective sleeves and work to do what constituents hired them to do.

There are at least 800,000 so-called Dreamers in America, children who were brought to America illegally by their parents. Most of these are young people who think of America as the only “home” they have ever known. Some are serving or have served in our military. Others, at least 2139 are known criminals who don’t appreciate the perks of DACA. Homeland Security Secretary Elaine Duke expressed the reason DACA is not a viable solution for Dreamers:

“I am very aware of the consequences of this action, and I sympathize with the DACA recipients whose futures may now be less certain,” Duke said in the memo, obtained by CNN. “But I am also frustrated on their behalf. DACA was never more than parole — a bureaucratic delay — that never promised the rights of citizenship or legal status in this country. And for that reason, DACA was fundamentally a lie that left recipients in two-year cycles of uncertainty.”

As the Dreamers clearly show this problem will repeat and repeat as long as foreign people are allowed to come here illegally, bring their families, and take advantage of generous services. It seems to me that enforcement of current immigration law must be priority one. The Trump administration has adopted this approach but future administrations could reverse the policy. Congress must adopt reforms that will eliminate this problem for the future. Whether they get it right is yet to be determined.

Ideas?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to DACA – Will Congress Get it Right?

  1. J. Soden says:

    Obumble’s DACA was also unconstitutional. He repeatedly said that he did not have the power to create law (via regulation) for 6 years and suddenly he created DACA.
    The Executive Branch CARRIES OUT laws created by Clowngress, therefore halting DACA and sending it to Clowngress was the correct – and CONSTITUTIONAL thing to do.
    Now we have 15 states suing to reinstate DACA, which any first-year law student knows is bogus.
    I keep remembering the swarm of children that swept across our Southern Border WITHOUT their parents that Obumble “welcomed” who are now getting benefits from the taxpayer. And I wonder why the older DACA kids never bothered to attempt to become citizens.
    DACA was a mess from day one – like so many of Obumble’s other ideas. And I have no hope that Clowngress will do any “fixing.”

  2. Post Scripts says:

    I’m tired of presidential orders being made as if its the law of the land. It’s not. I’m pleased that Trump walked this one back and put it on Congress to fix, because thats exactly where it belongs. Why Congress has not come up with a plan long before now amazes me? I’ve heard the excuse was, they were focused on fixing healthcare, wow, they can’t work on more than one thing at a time? And they did such a wonderful job fixing healthcare didn’t they?! I think an 8% approval rating for Congress is too generous.

    • Tina says:

      Ditto!

      Trumps main concern is the American worker. If Congress hasn’t got that by now they never will. His deal with Schummer and Pelosi today puts Republican elites and conservatives on notice. Work your magic and deliver what you promised or I’ll create collage style bills with Democrat and Republican moderates to get my agenda delivered.

      I’m in favor of ending the so-called anchor baby rule. To my knowledge no other nation has this incredibly stupid immigration law. A child is the ward of his parents until he reaches the age of consent and as such should carry the nationality of the parents.

      We need an improved seasonal worker program that includes transportation in and out of the country…families don’t come unless they are old enough and able to obtain work permits.

      Our current laws need to be enforced.

      And subsidized healthcare and education should be phased out or ended. The nations of origin need to be encouraged to adopt policies that keep their citizens home. We cannot take in, or save, the entire world. We can model the things that work…or at least we could until half of our citizens started modeling the things that don’t work!

    • J. Soden says:

      8%? WAY too high!

      It’s become so bad that “being a member of Clowngress” is NOT something you want to put on your job resume – unless you’re looking for a lobbyist job.

  3. Peggy says:

    Let’s take a trip back in time.

    Remember Democrats had control of the House and the Senate for two years and chose to do nothing about reforming our immigration laws. Instead they gave us ObamaCare.

    Remember Obama didn’t sign the DACA executive order until AFTER the 2012 election, so it wouldn’t be a reelection problem for him and knowing the mess he created with it would be left to his successor to clean up.

    Obama is on record over 20 times saying he couldn’t act as an imperial ruler and do what he wanted by not following the Constitution. Yet, when he could he did and everyone cheered him. Congressional democrats even gave him a standing ovation when he said if they wouldn’t do their job he would, so he did. He pulled out his pen and phone and wrote the laws he wanted.

    We became a country ruled by men and not laws any more. And once again the people cheered, “Go Obama, Go Obama……”

    Even liberal law professors and lawyers Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz made known their legal opinions on Trump’s and Obama’s actions. Turley even stated several times that Obama was the president Nixon wished he could have been.

    We either have laws or we don’t. This picking and choosing which ones we enforce depending on who’s in the WH and in control of Congress has to stop.

    Trump is playing with Congress and they’re too dumb to realize it. They have a 9-10% approval rating and Trump is going to use it against them to do their job or be replaced. He made a deal with the Democrats today after McConnell proved he couldn’t do his job of getting bills passed. So Trump had the four leaders over and negotiated the deal the Dems wanted. Pelosi and Schumar are high fiving it in front of every camera, while McConnell and Ryan are still trying to figure out what happened.

    What happened is they let Trump down when they didn’t pass the ObamaCare repeal bill. Don’t let it happen again. Warning shot #1 fired across bow.

    If you haven’t seen this video of Jonathan Turley on DACA it’s worth watching.

    Turley: DACA’s Problems Arose When Obama Made Law Instead of Congress:
    http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/09/05/daca-jonathan-turley-reacts-obama-made-law-executive-order-congress-didnt-pass

    • Peggy says:

      Second or third shot across DC Republican’s bow as a warning from Trump to do their job, support him and fulfill their campaign promises or they will be looking for a new job come Nov. 2018.

      Trump’s super PACs are ramping up to get candidates elected who will support his agenda. And if that means primairing current members in opposition to McConnell’s control of GOP funds, so be it. Trump’s PAC’s donations will come primarily from voters and the RNC/GOP’s will come from big businesses. It’s people who vote not businesses and they’ll go to the voting booth after forking over their hard earned money.

      Watching the news this morning has been like waking up in a different after hearing Democrats praising Trump while Republicans are furious at him.

      LOL pop the popcorn.

      Ex-Sheriff David Clarke to join pro-Trump super PAC:

      “Former Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke Jr. announced Tuesday he will join the super PAC devoted to electing candidates who support the Trump-Pence administration.

      Both the super PAC, America First Action, and a spokesperson for Clarke announced that he would join the team as a senior advisor and spokesman.

      “It’s truly an honor to join the America First Action team, most importantly because we share the same values that most hard-working, law-abiding Americans do,” Clarke, who resigned last week from his post as sheriff, said in a statement Tuesday. “It gives me the chance to do what I love most—promote President Trump’s agenda, including his fierce support for the American law enforcement officer, and ensure the will of the American people who got President Trump elected is not derailed by the left or the self-serving Washington establishment.”
      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/05/ex-sheriff-david-clarke-to-join-pro-trump-super-pac.html

  4. Tina says:

    Cal Thomas urges Congress to take a page from Hungary on both immigration and taxes.

    This stuff is so simple…so reasonable…so sane! What the he77 is wrong with people who just won’t get it!

  5. Chris says:

    I’m confused by the arguments here. If DACA is considered “legislation” that has to go through Congress, why wasn’t the same said of Trump’s travel ban? It would seem to me that if a president has the power to restrict immigration however he pleases, he would also have the power to allow immigrants to stay. And of course, the travel ban directly violated a duly-passed law forbidding national origin discrimination in the issuance of visas, while DACA did not violate any existing law.

  6. Tina says:

    I’m a bit confused too but it’s not surprising since the courts disagree and so many legal and journalistic opinions are partisan or activist. One simplified explanation is that one falls under presidential powers with respect to what was considered a potential national security threat and the other a matter of our nations broken or insufficient immigration law.

    “…the travel ban directly violated a duly-passed law forbidding national origin discrimination in the issuance of visas…”

    The travel “ban” isn’t correctly named. It represents a “temporary restriction,” not an absolute “ban,” on travel for people from certain nations that are/were considered hot beds of terrorist activity and recruitment. It was issued at a time when our intelligence informed of the intention of terrorists leaders to embed their “soldiers” with refugees (not visa holders) fleeing those designated nations. Trumps temporary ban was intended to give our government time to properly vet those refugees and visa holders coming to America only for a very short time.

    DACA was an EO that violated Separation of Powers, as Obama articulated many times. It was issued out of compassion and frustration perhaps but that’s no excuse to bypass Congress. It also provided false cover for those sanctuary types (cities, officials, and officers) who wished to defy current immigration law which was itself an egregious misuse and abuse of power.

    The problem for the courts is that the 1965 law signed by Johnson that bars “national” discrimination seems to be in conflict with the 1952 law that gives the president the ability to “suspend the entry” of “any class of aliens” that he finds are detrimental to the interest of the United States.

    The temporary “ban” is really just a suspension and not an effort to sidestep, change, or defy the 1965 law.

    It would be stupid to write law that prevents defense of the nation for obvious reasons. Id Democrats could let go of the tactic to smear their opponents perhaps workable legislation could be formulated,,,not holding my breath.

    NYT:

    Immigrants cannot legally be issued a visa if they are barred from entry. Thus, all orders under the 1952 law apply equally to entry and visa issuance, as his executive order acknowledges.

    Note that the discrimination ban applies only to immigrants. Legally speaking, immigrants are those who are given permanent United States residency. By contrast, temporary visitors like guest workers, students and tourists, as well as refugees, could still be barred. …

    … Congress amended the law in 1996 to state that “procedures” and “locations” for processing immigration applications cannot count as discrimination. While there is plenty of room for executive mischief there, the amendment made clear that Congress still wanted the discrimination ban to hold some force. …

    … Even if courts do find wiggle room here, discretion can be taken too far. If Mr. Trump can legally ban an entire region of the world, he would render Congress’s vision of unbiased legal immigration a dead letter. (The order did not ban an “entire region) An appeals court stopped President Barack Obama’s executive actions to spare millions of undocumented immigrants from deportations for the similar reason that he was circumventing Congress. Some discretion? Sure. Discretion to rewrite the law? Not in America’s constitutional system.

    “… while DACA did not violate any existing law.”

    Are you kidding! DACA “children” are in the country illegally, whether or not they had anything to do with coming across our border without permission. Of course it violated existing law.

    “Deferred Action,” included in the title, signals an authorization to delay an officers or courts obligation to uphold the law!

    Our Congress has been kicking this can down the road for a long time. They thought they fixed it under Reagan but obviously they didn’t address the underlying problems. The “one time” amnesty did not stop, change, or fix the incentives that bring people to our country illegally…that is a big problem and the source of our disagreement and derision on illegal migration into our country.

    • Peggy says:

      I believe the temporary travel ban was just for 90 days. It was to give the FBI time to review their vetting process for those countries the Obama administration had identified as a problem.

  7. Peggy says:

    On a related subject Mike Lee’s speech today on the Senate floor is a must watch.

    “Mike Lee gave a brilliant speech on the Senate Floor today on the despicable religious tests Democrats are beginning to use against nominees that come before them.

    Of course he referenced the remarks from yesterday that we covered from Dianne Feinstein . He also referenced remarks from Bernie Sanders earlier this year that were even worse.

    The speech runs ten minutes but my favorite part comes in the second half where Lee points out how Democrats are more than willing to force Christians to violate their faith by forcing us to bake gay wedding cakes or by forcing Nuns to purchase contraceptive coverage. Boom! He gives more examples but I’ll let that be a surprise in the video.”

    http://therightscoop.com/watch-mike-lee-gives-brilliant-speech-slamming-democrats-for-using-religious-tests-on-nominees/#ixzz4s9Rl1GL2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.