Reply With Quote
It's simply a change in policy.
Policy =/= law
I'm not saying it's not the right thing to do but it's not the executive branches place to do it without input from congress...gotta say it's a smart move, though...anyone arguing against Obama's right to arbitrarily start changing laws will superficially look like they are arguing against hispanics...
Obama makes election-year change in deportation policy
By Jonathan Easley and Jordy Yager - 06/15/12 10:03 AM ET
The Obama administration announced Friday it will stop deporting illegal immigrants who come to the country at a young age.
The politically charged decision comes as Obama faces a tough reelection fight against Republican Mitt Romney, with Hispanic voters in swing states seen as a key bloc.
The change in policy could allow as many as 800,000 immigrants who came to the United States illegally not only to remain in the country without fear of being deported, but to work legally, according to a senior administration official speaking to reporters Friday.
Obama is set to make a statement at 1:15 p.m. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced the new policy Friday morning.
“Our nation’s immigration laws must be enforced in a firm and sensible manner,” Napolitano said in a statement. “But they are not designed to be blindly enforced without consideration given to the individual cir stances of each case. Nor are they designed to remove productive young people to countries where they may not have lived or even speak the language. Discretion, which is used in so many other areas, is especially justified here.”
The new policy will not grant citizenship to children who came to the United States as illegal immigrants, but will remove the threat of deportation and grant them the right to work in the United States.
According to the Department of Homeland Security, the policy change will apply to those who came to the United States before they were 16 and who are younger than 30 if they have lived here for five years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or served in the military.
A memo from Napolitano ordering the "prosecutorial discretion with respect to individuals who came to the United States as children" argued that those covered by the order "only know this country as home." It said these people "lacked the intent to violate the law."
The new policy will apply to individuals who are already in deportation proceedings, the memo said.
The law will accomplish portions of the DREAM Act, which has stalled in Congress amid Republican opposition. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a potential vice presidential candidate, says he is working on his own version of the DREAM Act, but the Democratic version is wildly popular among Hispanics and no legislation from Congress would be expected to pass this year.
Obama has a massive lead over Mitt Romney among Hispanic voters, but criticism from immigration activists over the administration’s deportation policies has intensified in recent weeks. Earlier this week a government report showed the administration’s attempt to cut back on deportations of law-abiding illegal immigrants has had little effect.
Hispanic voters could be key in the swing states of Florida, Virginia, Colorado and Nevada, among other states.
"It's a medium-risk, high-reward strategy," said Democratic strategist Jamal Simmons. "I think you risk angering people who are upset about immigration, yes. But for a president who’s got to win Florida, Nevada, Colorado, it is definitely something that can give the Latino community something to rally around."
The new immigration announcement comes eight months after the Obama administration set an annual record for deportations by removing nearly 400,000 people who were in the country illegally in fiscal 2011.
Of the 396,906 individuals removed, more than half — 216,698 — had been previously convicted of felonies or misdemeanors, which represents a 90 percent increase in the number of criminals deported over fiscal 2008, according to the numbers released by Immigration and Customs Enforcement last October.
A spokesman for Homeland Security said the department would continues to focus its enforcement resources on "the removal of individuals who pose a national security or public safety risk, including immigrants convicted of crimes, violent criminals, felons and repeat immigration-law offenders."
"Today’s action further enhances the department’s ability to focus on these priority removals," the spokesman said.
The National Immigration Law Center (NILC), an immigration reform advocacy group, lauded Obama's announcement on Friday, saying it was evidence of his "true capacity to lead."
The group then said it was time for Congress to pass the DREAM Act.
“President Obama is showing the nation his true capacity to lead by taking the bold and courageous step to remove the fear of deportation and provide dreamers with the legal means to contribute their full potential to society," said Marielena Hincapie, the executive director for the group.
"This announcement provides real and much-needed relief now, but it is not enough. President Obama cannot provide these youth with the path to citizenship, which would allow DREAMers to participate in all sectors of civil society. We therefore renew our calls to Congress to pass the DREAM Act.”
NILC is one of the immigrant activist groups that had previously been critical of the administration's immigration policy.
"We’ve been disappointed by the administration’s record pace of deportations, and DREAMers have been among those deported," said Adela de la Torre, communications manager for the NILC, in an email to The Hill. "This is why today’s announcement is so important."
It's simply a change in policy.
Policy =/= law
uhhhhhh sorry buckwheat.
It's the job of congress to write laws. It's the job of the executive branch to enforce the laws as written.
We are a cons utional republic, not a dictatorship.
I think it could backfire politically. I don't doubt that it has anything to do with anything other than election-year politics...I'm just saying I think it could backfire.
Again, I'm not saying I disagree with the policy.
I'm saying it was a brazen political move to pander to hispanic voters right before the election and intentionally exceeds the authority of the executive branch. He is hoping it pisses off congress and they fight him over it and hoping hispanics are stupid enough to think the fight is over being pro/con hispanic and not over the President exceeding the cons utional authority of the executive branch.
Actually, the law states that the determination for deportation should be made by an administrative immigration judge. So that is indeed a change in policy.
What's a load of bull is the "work" part. The law is clear that you cannot legally work in this country without a proper visa/residency status.
But it's Napolitano... no surprises there.
Which law states that illegal immigrants must be deported, spanky?
Existing US immigration law.
duh...
lol @ spanky.
You forget. This guy wants to be dictator.
They can choose not to enforce a law, but they still can't make them legal residents without changing the law. States can still come down on employers who hire them.
This guy is a joke, but them we already knew that.
Bet they let them vote, too.
He just bought another 800,000 votes with the stroke of a pen.
Hmmm....I wonder what all the unemployed legal citizens think about the executive order to legally add 800,000 illegals to the job market as their compe ion?
Good question. If they had any honor and wanted to work instead of sitting on their asses, they would vote against him. I have a feeling that they are the ones who think these jobs are below them though. I just wish more people would realize that any piss poor job is better than having no job. It's at least 5 times easier to get a good job if you are already employed. This way, those making the hiring decisions know you aren't a flake.
Pandering?
Like passing Medicare Advantage (with a $50B subsidy to health insurance gougers so they could compete with more efficient Medicare) and totally unfunded Medicare Part D, both during the 2003 campaign?
It was what the democrats promised and never delivered, and you lib s will never get over that hurt.
illegal immigrants come to USA to make money, and US businessmen are thrilled to be able to exploit them, underpay them, and not pay them.
What evidence do you have, your xenophobic stance isn't evidence, that illegal immigrants don't work?
Yep, smart of him to lock up the votes of those 800,000 people who aren't allowed to vote.
And all this is wrong.
I didn't say illegal immigrants don't work. My stance is that we should have the people here without jobs, that collect social benefits, fill those jobs. If they refuse, they lose their benefits.
We don't need to add more low skilled people to the US. It is counterproductive to growth. If employers cannot find employees at the wages offered, then they may have to increase their wages. Allowing illegals in keeps wages down.
Is it your stance to allow illegal immigration, adding to the low job skill labor pool, and keeping wages down as dictated by supply and demand economics?
Sure about that? We haven't seen the executive order, yet.
Which you obviously didn't read up on before posting.
Per the usual.
you troll.
It's a little big to cut and paste just because you intentionally asked a stupid question.
You're right. It's completely reasonable to assume that the executive order will include insta-citizenship for these 800,000 folks.
but hush limbaugh said he would ge the 800,000 votes..
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
