As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Tag Archives: immigration

Court Refuses to Allow Obama Amnesty to Proceed

A panel of a federal appeals court Tuesday declined to reverse a district court judge’s ruling that blocked President Obama’s plan to grant temporary amnesty for some 5 million illegal immigrants, saying that overriding the ruling could force states to take irreversible actions that would become illegal if the challenge to Obama’s action prevails.

According to the 2-1 ruling:

A stay would enable DAPA beneficiaries to apply for driver’s licenses and other benefits, and it would be difficult for the states to retract those benefits or recoup their costs even if they won on the merits. That is particularly true in light of the district court’s findings regarding the large number of potential beneficiaries, including at least 500,000 in Texas alone.

Obama’s amnesty is seen by opponents as a rank end-around of Congress, granting legal status and benefits to millions of illegal immigrants by simply making them a low priority for prosecution. How a decision to defer prosecuting an illegal immigrant gives them legal rights is something I have never understood.

Now, it appears, the courts may be having trouble with it too.

The administration will no doubt appeal, but it’s unclear whether it will go directly to the Supreme Court.

Obama’s two most significant policies – this and Obamacare – hang by legal threads. It’s indicative of the divisive, imperious nature of this presidency that Obama governs by such questionably legal means.

Judge to DOJ: “Like an Idiot,” I believed you

What? The Obama administration lie? I’m sorry – misstate the truth?

Judge Andrew Hanen, who blocked President Obama executive amnesty order, waited until mid-February to do so because he was assured by Justice Department attorneys that they wouldn’t be doing any amnesties until then.

Oops.

According to National Review:

Early this month the government’s attorneys admitted that they misled Judge Hanen. Between November 20, when President Obama issued his fiat, and February 16, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) granted approximately 100,000 applications for deferred action under the expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program created in DAPA.

Did the government’s lawyers lie? Or did they make a months-long mistake? That was the question posed to the DOJ’s legal team by a visibly angry Judge Hanen in a hearing in Brownsville, Texas, last Thursday.

Deputy Assistant Attorney General Kathleen Hartnett could not explain why multiple DOJ lawyers — herself included — told the court multiple times over two and a half months that DHS would not be accepting requests for deferred action under the challenged order until mid February . . .

It seems clear what Hanen thinks happened: “When I asked you what would happen and you said nothing, I took it to heart. I was made to look like an idiot,” Hanen told Hartnett. “I believed your word that nothing would happen. . . . Like an idiot, I believed that.”

Let me help poor judge Hanen out. From the works of Saul Alinsky:

The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles.

Yes, judge, you were made into an idiot. A useful idiot.

Federal Judge Blocks Obama Immigration Order

For today, at least, we return to being a nation of laws.

A federal judge in Texas Monday issued an injunction that would temporarily block President Obama’s unilateral immigration amnesty.

U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen in Brownsville indicated that Obama had acted unconstitutionally by circumventing Congress, saying that no law permits illegal immigrants to stay.

Actually, “the law mandates that these illegally-present individuals be removed,” Hanen wrote.

A portion of the amnesty, that which would expand non-deportability to more illegal aliens whose parents had brought them to the United States, was scheduled to go into effect Wednesday. It appears that will now be delayed.

This is pretty significant. Do I know that because I an immigration lawyer? No. But I can tell because the White House released a statement at 2:30 in the morning vowing to appeal the decision.

Order blocking Obama plan to defer deportation

Federal Judge: Obama Immigration Order Unconstitutional

In the first court opinion on the issue, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled that President Obama’s immigration actions are an unconstitutional abuse of presidential power.

U.S. District Court Judge Arthur Schwab, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote the opinion in relation to a criminal case he was reviewing. It appears to me he was looking to weigh in the matter, and the opinion may have little practical effect other than to raise awareness that the immigration fiat might be challengeable in court.

According to Fox News:

(Schwab) wrote that the action goes beyond so-called “prosecutorial discretion” — which is the “discretion” the administration cites in determining whether to pursue deportation against illegal immigrants . . .

Schwab . . . wrote that this “systematic and rigid process” applies to a “broad range” of enforcement decisions, as opposed to dealing with matters on a “case-by-case basis.”

Further, he wrote that the action goes beyond deferring deportation by letting beneficiaries apply for work authorization and allowing some to become “quasi-United States citizens.”

He also cited Obama’s argument that he was proceeding with executive action after Congress failed to act on comprehensive immigration legislation, and countered: “Congressional inaction does not endow legislative power with the Executive.”

Levin’s Epic Rant Rips the Republican RINO Establishment

Radio talk show host Mark Levin went on an epic tear last night, searing a verbal gash into the deserving folks who lead the Republican Party.

You can listen to Levin’s criticism here. It comes at the beginning of the December 15th show. Levin says he is “an inch away” from leaving the Republicans. I don’t think he’ll do that, because there’s nowhere else to go. But I don’t doubt his sincerity or blame him for his frustration.

You see, Levin’s point is very straightforward, even though its seems mysterious to most Republicans: The people have handed the GOP – I hesitate to use the initials, since it certainly is an old Party, but not acting very grand – an historic victory, an opportunity, and even a responsibility. And yet they squandered it so everyone could go home and decorate their Christmas trees.

To have gained power without even a symbolic effort – other than that waged by Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Mike Lee, R-Utah, which just pissed everyone off – to take down President Obama’s immigration order or stop his $1.1 trillion spending eruption is a disgrace.

As I’ve written before, I believe Americans will understand that if you are really angry about something, really passionate about something, you don’t put off for months your effort to combat it when an opportunity, however quixotic, arises.

IF A MAN CHEATS ON HIS WIFE, DOES SHE TELL HIM, “LET’S HAVE CHRISTMAS FIRST AND I’LL GET ANGRY AT YOU NEXT YEAR??”

And it will take passion, irrational commitment, and an understanding of the stakes involved for Republicans to make any progress at all in repairing the damage Obama has done. The GOP leadership’s determination to fold on these issues is a sure sign they don’t get that even as they ascend to authority, their power is being ripped from them by a president determined to rule, when he wants to, on his own.

The Republicans, with their vow to take care of business in . . . February  . . .  bring to mind this skit from Monty Python’s Flying Circus. Think of Obama as the marriage counselor, Republicans as Arthur Puty, and Deidre Puty as Article I of the U.S. Constitution. You’ll get what I mean.

Cruz Puts GOP Leaders on Notice

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, put Republican leaders on notice Friday that he intends to hold them to their word that they will seek to scuttle President Obama’s executive amnesty next year, forcing the Senate into an unwelcome Saturday workday and a symbolic vote related to the amnesty.

Senators thought they had a deal to finish their business for the year quickly on Monday after a quiet weekend. Instead, they will have to spend all day and into the evening Saturday making cumbersome procedural votes on unconfirmed Obama nominees.

Cruz will also put senators on record on the immigration fiat with a “point-of-order” procedural objection to funding for the amnesty. “This procedural tool will ensure that every Senator will be on record regarding the constitutionality of President Obama’s illegal amnesty,” said Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier.

Cruz made a stinging speech from the floor Friday saying he takes GOP leaders “at their word” that they’ll fight the amnesty next year, but actually making clear he doesn’t:

I take them at their word. But I would note that a whole lot of citizens across this country feel a little bit like Charlie Brown with Lucy and the football, when fight after fight, leadership in Congress says we’ll fight next time. Not this time . . . the wise thing to do is to fight in a month, fight in two months, fight in three months. Not now.

There comes a point where Charlie Brown has kicked the football and fallen on his rear end one two many times. So, when our leaders in both chambers say as a commitment we will fight and we will stop President Obama’s illegal amnesty, I take them at their word. But, I am confident the American people will hold them to their word.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, joined in Cruz’s effort.

Cruz is showing a lot of gumption by again being willing to piss off so many of his colleagues. In the college campus atmosphere of Capitol Hill and amid the clubby chuminess of the Senate, this is no easy thing to do on a personal level.

Principle? Egotism? Ambition? I’m sure all are playing a role here. Whatever the root of it, I love it when someone is willing to rudely interfere with a stale consensus. Especially when making such a very important point.

The GOP Takes Obama’s Bait; to be Reeled in Next Year

By not making a stand against President Obama’s amnesty fiat now, Republicans have made a critical tactical mistake that could ruin their chance to seriously oppose the greatest un-Constitutional presidential power grab in memory.

Unless, of course, House Speaker Boehner and Senate Minority Leader McConnell are fully aware of the consequences of their decision and aren’t making a mistake at all.

As you probably know, the $1.1 trillion “Cromnimbus” spending bill Boehner and his lieutenants rammed through the House Thursday funds the government for a year, except for the Department of Homeland Security, the funding for which runs out at the end of February. This supposedly clever move sets up a potential fight over the funding within Homeland Security that will be used to enforce Obama’s amnesty order.

But by failing to strike now, when the wound Obama inflicted was still fresh and they maintained the leverage of shutting down the entire federal government – and keeping Obama from his Hawaii vacation – Republicans have put themselves in a precarious position.

Obama fishing

The White House argument early next year will be simple: Republicans, by creating a fight over the Department of Homeland Security spending bill, are jeopardizing national security, while the president is responsible and wants to safeguard the country. And who remembers that silly immigration order anyway?

With the issue narrowly focused on homeland security and immigration – and frightening thoughts of angry Latino voters dancing in their heads – Republicans won’t have the stomach for the fight. Obama, who never has to stand for election again – and who will have no vacation planned until August – will be steeled to do what it takes to preserve one of the major “accomplishments” of his presidency.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest Thursday offered up a superbly produced preview trailer for the full movie, release date February 2015:

The premise of your question, Major, is that there may be some Republicans who will threaten to cease funding for border security, for criminal background checks and for the other elements of our national security infrastructure that are critical to our homeland security just because they’re upset with the president taking executive action on immigration reform.

I recognize that there has been a passionate response in some Republican quarters to this executive action, but I don’t think the vast majority of Republicans think it would be a good idea to stop funding for the kinds of personnel and programs that are critical to our homeland security . . .

My sense is that even Republicans would not want to be in a position of saying, ‘You know what? We should stop funding for our border patrol officers who are putting their lives on the line to secure our border just because I’m pretty mad at the president about his executive action on immigration, that — that thing that he announced about three months ago . . .

I do feel confident in saying they will not have widespread support among the American people for this.

Using the same awful logic that one death is a tragedy while a million a statistic, Republicans will have a harder time denying federal funding for an agency that includes vital security functions than they would have resisting the more diffuse case against shutting the whole government down. Think only of the terms involved: federal government, not a sympathetic entity to many, versus homeland security. Now who doesn’t want to secure the homeland?

People will wonder, with some justification, why, if the immigration order was so bad, Republicans didn’t move to scuttle it right away?

The Obama White House is limping toward its finish line, but it still has a few tricks up its sleeve. And Republicans just fell for one of them, hook, line, and sinker.

H/T CNS News.

WH: Obama Spoke “Colloquially” on Changing Immigration Law

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest today tried to claim President Obama was speaking “colloquially” when he said last week that he had taken action to “change” the immigration law. Obama of course when he’s on script says he is not lawmaking, merely exercising “prosecutorial discretion,” or some such thing. Alternatively, Earnest said Obama was referring… Continue Reading

White House Chief of Staff Delivers Weekly Message in Spanish

Are we a bilingual country or what!! Usually it’s some lower level functionary, but this morning the second most powerful person in the White House is speaking Spanish to America. I feel so bad for my grandparents today. How is it that Roosevelt never gave one of his fireside chats in Yiddish? I mean, there… Continue Reading

WH Law Prof Letter Backing Order Written by Democrats

Liberals love to express there disgust with Fox News. But this is why there is a Fox News. The Obama administration released a letter from law professors asserting that Obama’s executive order on immigration was 100 percent Kosher for Passover. Seven of the ten, turns out, are registered Democrats according to Fox. Two others who live… Continue Reading