Obama Executive Order

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

How many here support Obama's apparent intention to issue an EO stopping deportation of millions of illegal immigrants?

[RunInRed 16,360]

Depends, what's your current citizenship status?

[TexasTiger 12,800]

How many here support Obama's apparent intention to issue an EO stopping deportation of millions of illegal immigrants?

He's just trying to be like Reagan.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

I support the protection of those who were brought here as children and know no other place as their home. I support the EO method if there can be no compromise.

[TheBlueVue 177]

I support the protection of those who were brought here as children and know no other place as their home. I support the EO method if there can be no compromise.

So, you support moving to a dictatorship in America? Clearly, you do not understand that the Constitution is difficult to change by design. It is a feature to prevent any single party from usurping powers they do not have. That you are for abusing the Constitution belies your conservative claims. It is an enumerated power of Congress to set the pathway of naturalization NOT the Executive Branch. I would much prefer a president that actually enforced the law he swore to enforce than have a dictator simply ignore the laws he doesn't like and completely circumvent the legislative process to enact sweeping laws for which he has no statutory authorization to pass but, you see, Im a conservative and that makes all the difference.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

RIR and TexT....wont answer?......so you dodge.

[autigeremt 6,569]

I support the protection of those who were brought here as children and know no other place as their home. I support the EO method if there can be no compromise.

That's a bit disturbing (EO).

[RunInRed 16,360]

If the question is: Am I in favor of an EO to thaw the gridlock in Congress? ... Then the answer is emphatically, YES ... they've been sitting on Immigration Reform for at least 2 years.

[cooltigger21 0]

This EO is meant to encourage another round of illegals to come here. Even if the thing gets reversed by the next president, anyone that gets here is unlikely to ever be sent back and he knows that. He's already handcuffed the BP and ICE and will continue to do so. No border enforcement of any consequence is coming from this administration.

[TheBlueVue 177]

This EO is meant to encourage another round of illegals to come here. Even if the thing gets reversed by the next president, anyone that gets here is unlikely to ever be sent back and he knows that. He's already handcuffed the BP and ICE and will continue to do so. No border enforcement of any consequence is coming from this administration.

And the ironic aspect of Obama's head strong position is he is going against what HE, himself, said were the risks involved in an influx of illegal aliens on blue collar workers:

President Obama once declared that an influx of illegal immigrants will harm “the wages of blue-collar Americans” and “put strains on an already overburdened safety net.”

“[T]here’s no denying that many blacks share the same anxieties as many whites about the wave of illegal immigration flooding our Southern border—a sense that what’s happening now is fundamentally different from what has gone on before,” then-Senator Obama wrote in his 2006 autobiography, “The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.”

These are BHO's own words which begs the question..does the guy have any real convictions about anything other than fundamentally transforming America into his vision of multiculturalism?

The real reason nothing has been accomplished is because Obama wont accept anything short of exactly what he wants. Anyone in favor of an EO because of presumed gridlock has to look no further than their own President for the source of this impasse. In any event, gridlock or not, the President simply does not have statutory authorization to circumvent the legislative process on a pathway to naturalization for immigrants. Where does it end? This is NOT a dictatorship and the difficulties of changing the law is by design a very difficult proposition but it in no way gives a President carte blanche authority to trample the Constitution simply because Congress hasn't given him exactly what he wants.

Enforcing the laws already on the books would be an ausipicious beginning to constructive legislative dialogue

[channonc 466]

I am not that comfortable with this being handled by EO. However, if Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans were serious about immigration reform they would either put out their own proposal or pass/amend the Senate bill. Otherwise, just admit you think the status quo is acceptable. Anything less and they are talking out of both sides of their mouth. We need reform, but we aren't willing to actually reform it therefore we ultimately don't think we need it.

Congress is failing to do its job which is to legislate. When you don't do your job, it leaves the Administration open to find ways to do it for you, and that is not how our government was intended to work.

[TheBlueVue 177]

I am not that comfortable with this being handled by EO. However, if Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans were serious about immigration reform they would either put out their own proposal or pass/amend the Senate bill. Otherwise, just admit you think the status quo is acceptable. Anything less and they are talking out of both sides of their mouth. We need reform, but we aren't willing to actually reform it therefore we ultimately don't think we need it.

Congress is failing to do its job which is to legislate. When you don't do your job, it leaves the Administration open to find ways to do it for you, and that is not how our government was intended to work.

The House hasn't put forth anything new because the central point of their plan has been categorically rejected and that is doing border security first. I believe most reasonable people agree that our borders are neither secure nor are they even being enforced. The House, who is responding to the will of the people, wants that done before anything else is even considered and i agree with their position. An overwhelming majority of Americans are against the President using EO to address this problem.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

RIR......the question is very clear so need to say "if."

channoc......I agree with you that Congress hasn't done it's job. We probably disagree on why that is. But I don't think that justifies the POTUS stopping deportations by EO. If Eric Holder had been enforcing EXISTING laws since he has ben AG the number of illegals we have to deal with would be far less.

[channonc 466]

I am not that comfortable with this being handled by EO. However, if Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans were serious about immigration reform they would either put out their own proposal or pass/amend the Senate bill. Otherwise, just admit you think the status quo is acceptable. Anything less and they are talking out of both sides of their mouth. We need reform, but we aren't willing to actually reform it therefore we ultimately don't think we need it.

Congress is failing to do its job which is to legislate. When you don't do your job, it leaves the Administration open to find ways to do it for you, and that is not how our government was intended to work.

The House hasn't put forth anything new because the central point of their plan has been categorically rejected and that is doing border security first. I believe most reasonable people agree that our borders are neither secure nor are they even being enforced. The House, who is responding to the will of the people, wants that done before anything else is even considered and i agree with their position. An overwhelming majority of Americans are against the President using EO to address this problem.

Wow. What an excuse! They could put forward a bill with the central idea of border security while addressing other things that aren't so controversial (expansion of certain visas, etc.). I have yet to see that proposal. So again, more bloviating, and no actual solutions.

[channonc 466]

RIR......the question is very clear so need to say "if."

channoc......I agree with you that Congress hasn't done it's job. We probably disagree on why that is. But I don't think that justifies the POTUS stopping deportations by EO. If Eric Holder had been enforcing EXISTING laws since he has ben AG the number of illegals we have to deal with would be far less.

I am not trying to justify anything, just pointing out that if you don't do your job, someone else is likely to do it and you won't like it. Again, I don't think I am for an EO, but Congress has to look in the mirror. The Senate did their job... we are still waiting on Speaker Boehner and crew to put some bills behind the rhetoric.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

channoc.....I didn't mean to even imply you were justifying anything. And I agree with you re. Congress although I disagree it isn't all the House's fault. IMHO your friend Harry Reid is just s responsible for this Congress' dismal record. I also don't agree that someone else, even the POTUS, should do it if it violates the Constitution.

[AUUSN 823]

• Deferred enforced departure (DED). DED derives from the president’s power to conduct foreign relations and enforce immigration laws.[7] Federal courts have recognized this authority as well.[8] In the past, presidents have granted DED to people from countries where a natural disaster or domestic conflict had occurred that made it dangerous for people from those countries to return to them.
  

“Whether it is deferred action, parole, or something else, these concepts are grounded in statute, regulations and sound principles of law enforcement,” according to David Leopold, past president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.[9]

Have presidents acted before to grant administrative relief?

Several presidents, both Republican and Democratic, have granted administrative relief.

• Prosecutorial discretion actions such as the creation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program have been part of the immigration system for at least 35 years.
  
• In 1980, President Jimmy Carter exercised parole authority to allow Cubans to enter the U.S., and about 123,000 “Mariel Cubans” were paroled into the U.S. by 1981.
  
• In 1990, President George H.W. Bush issued an executive order that granted DED to certain nationals of the People’s Republic of China who were in the U.S.
  
• In 1992, the Bush administration granted DED to certain nationals of El Salvador.
  
• In 1997, President Bill Clinton issued an executive order granting DED to certain Haitians who had arrived in the U.S. before Dec. 31, 1995.[10]
  
• In 2010 the Obama administration began a policy of granting parole to the spouses, parents, and children of military members.
  

http://www.nilc.org/execauthorityimm.html

[TheBlueVue 177]

I am not that comfortable with this being handled by EO. However, if Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans were serious about immigration reform they would either put out their own proposal or pass/amend the Senate bill. Otherwise, just admit you think the status quo is acceptable. Anything less and they are talking out of both sides of their mouth. We need reform, but we aren't willing to actually reform it therefore we ultimately don't think we need it.

Congress is failing to do its job which is to legislate. When you don't do your job, it leaves the Administration open to find ways to do it for you, and that is not how our government was intended to work.

The House hasn't put forth anything new because the central point of their plan has been categorically rejected and that is doing border security first. I believe most reasonable people agree that our borders are neither secure nor are they even being enforced. The House, who is responding to the will of the people, wants that done before anything else is even considered and i agree with their position. An overwhelming majority of Americans are against the President using EO to address this problem.

Wow. What an excuse! They could put forward a bill with the central idea of border security while addressing other things that aren't so controversial (expansion of certain visas, etc.). I have yet to see that proposal. So again, more bloviating, and no actual solutions.

You fail to acknowledge the rigidity of BHO. his idea of an effective Congress is one that lays down and does everything he tells them to do. When they dont respond accordingly he takes to his bully pulpit using his megaphone to drown out every other voice. This is not an excuse..this is a fact. You dont seem to understand that there is only one way of doing things for this president..his way or the highway and you can call that bloviating if you wish but, I call it a sad day for America when a President has convinced the people that his failures are all the fault of his political opposition.

[AUUSN 823]

Deferred Enforced Departure

Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) is in the President’s discretion to authorize as part of his power to conduct foreign relations. Although DED is not a specific immigration status, individuals covered by DED are not subject to removal from the United States, usually for a designated period of time.

"In 2007, President George W. Bush directed that Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) be provided for 18 months to certain Liberians in the United States whose Temporary Protected Status (TPS) was expiring on September 30, 2007. President Bush further directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue procedures for granting work authorization to DED-covered Liberians. In March 2009, President Obama extended DED for Liberians an additional 12 months. In March 2010, August 2011 and March 2013, President Obama extended DED for Liberians an additional 18 months each time. In September of 2013, President Obama extended DED for Liberians an additional 24 months."

http://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/temporary-protected-status-deferred-enforced-departure/ded-granted-country-liberia/ded-granted-country-liberia

[cooltigger21 0]

I am not that comfortable with this being handled by EO. However, if Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans were serious about immigration reform they would either put out their own proposal or pass/amend the Senate bill. Otherwise, just admit you think the status quo is acceptable. Anything less and they are talking out of both sides of their mouth. We need reform, but we aren't willing to actually reform it therefore we ultimately don't think we need it.

Congress is failing to do its job which is to legislate. When you don't do your job, it leaves the Administration open to find ways to do it for you, and that is not how our government was intended to work.

The House hasn't put forth anything new because the central point of their plan has been categorically rejected and that is doing border security first. I believe most reasonable people agree that our borders are neither secure nor are they even being enforced. The House, who is responding to the will of the people, wants that done before anything else is even considered and i agree with their position. An overwhelming majority of Americans are against the President using EO to address this problem.

Wow. What an excuse! They could put forward a bill with the central idea of border security while addressing other things that aren't so controversial (expansion of certain visas, etc.). I have yet to see that proposal. So again, more bloviating, and no actual solutions.

You can put all the border security measures you want into a bill and pass it but they are useless if the person who is charged with enforcing the laws refuses to do so. As a matter of fact that only encourages more illegals so come here and that is the exact thing the democrats want to see happen. These people are not being harmed by not being granted legal status so there is no reason to do this now.

[TheBlueVue 177]

I am not that comfortable with this being handled by EO. However, if Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans were serious about immigration reform they would either put out their own proposal or pass/amend the Senate bill. Otherwise, just admit you think the status quo is acceptable. Anything less and they are talking out of both sides of their mouth. We need reform, but we aren't willing to actually reform it therefore we ultimately don't think we need it.

Congress is failing to do its job which is to legislate. When you don't do your job, it leaves the Administration open to find ways to do it for you, and that is not how our government was intended to work.

The House hasn't put forth anything new because the central point of their plan has been categorically rejected and that is doing border security first. I believe most reasonable people agree that our borders are neither secure nor are they even being enforced. The House, who is responding to the will of the people, wants that done before anything else is even considered and i agree with their position. An overwhelming majority of Americans are against the President using EO to address this problem.

Wow. What an excuse! They could put forward a bill with the central idea of border security while addressing other things that aren't so controversial (expansion of certain visas, etc.). I have yet to see that proposal. So again, more bloviating, and no actual solutions.

You can put all the border security measures you want into a bill and pass it but they are useless if the person who is charged with enforcing the laws refuses to do so. As a matter of fact that only encourages more illegals so come here and that is the exact thing the democrats want to see happen. These people are not being harmed by not being granted legal status so there is no reason to do this now.

It boils down to one very simple fact. Congress does not trust the WH to do the right thing and they have good reason for being very wary of a guy who lies at his convenience and is on record saying many things but when the rubber meets the road it turns out to be something altogether different

[Grumps 3,693]

You HAVE to start with enforcing the law. It's that simple. While you are enforcing the law it is perfectly fine to work to change the law. There can be no good-faith negotiotiations if one side is going to refuse to enforce the current law while attempting to get the law changed. I truly think that for the most part, both sides want the same thing--Streamline the process for legal immigration, let in as many immigrants as possible who are good for the country, keep out potential immigrants who are bad for the country. Obviously, the devil is in the details, but it all starts with enforcing the law.

[channonc 466]

You HAVE to start with enforcing the law. It's that simple. While you are enforcing the law it is perfectly fine to work to change the law. There can be no good-faith negotiotiations if one side is going to refuse to enforce the current law while attempting to get the law changed. I truly think that for the most part, both sides want the same thing--Streamline the process for legal immigration, let in as many immigrants as possible who are good for the country, keep out potential immigrants who are bad for the country. Obviously, the devil is in the details, but it all starts with enforcing the law.

There are ways Congress can make the Admin enforce the law. This is just political speak. Give me a real reason for the delay in legislation.

[cooltigger21 0]

You HAVE to start with enforcing the law. It's that simple. While you are enforcing the law it is perfectly fine to work to change the law. There can be no good-faith negotiotiations if one side is going to refuse to enforce the current law while attempting to get the law changed. I truly think that for the most part, both sides want the same thing--Streamline the process for legal immigration, let in as many immigrants as possible who are good for the country, keep out potential immigrants who are bad for the country. Obviously, the devil is in the details, but it all starts with enforcing the law.

There are ways Congress can make the Admin enforce the law. This is just political speak. Give me a real reason for the delay in legislation.

Give me a reason why we have to do this now? That is the question at hand. How is delaying this hurting these people? Can Congress force the president to enforce the law? The only power they have is to either impeach or use the power of the purse to hold back funds but that still doesn't force him to take the handcuffs off of the agencies charged with enforcing the immigration laws.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

I am not that comfortable with this being handled by EO. However, if Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans were serious about immigration reform they would either put out their own proposal or pass/amend the Senate bill. Otherwise, just admit you think the status quo is acceptable. Anything less and they are talking out of both sides of their mouth. We need reform, but we aren't willing to actually reform it therefore we ultimately don't think we need it.

Congress is failing to do its job which is to legislate. When you don't do your job, it leaves the Administration open to find ways to do it for you, and that is not how our government was intended to work.

The House hasn't put forth anything new because the central point of their plan has been categorically rejected and that is doing border security first. I believe most reasonable people agree that our borders are neither secure nor are they even being enforced. The House, who is responding to the will of the people, wants that done before anything else is even considered and i agree with their position. An overwhelming majority of Americans are against the President using EO to address this problem.

Wow. What an excuse! They could put forward a bill with the central idea of border security while addressing other things that aren't so controversial (expansion of certain visas, etc.). I have yet to see that proposal. So again, more bloviating, and no actual solutions.

You fail to acknowledge the rigidity of BHO. his idea of an effective Congress is one that lays down and does everything he tells them to do. When they dont respond accordingly he takes to his bully pulpit using his megaphone to drown out every other voice. This is not an excuse..this is a fact. You dont seem to understand that there is only one way of doing things for this president..his way or the highway and you can call that bloviating if you wish but, I call it a sad day for America when a President has convinced the people that his failures are all the fault of his political opposition.

Beautifully written rhetoric with the obligatory personal dig thrown in. Great post!