Obama's Executive Order[W:265]

mike2810 · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

One question came to mind was how is an illegal alien going to prove they have been living in the US five or more years ago and the Feds verify what is submitted is true . They are undocumented, may be using false ssn or id, etc. With the priority shift to felons, etc, I see no real advantage for one to come forward. The Feds will not be targeting the working "family member" anyway.

imo, The EO is poorly thought out.

Henrin · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

mike2810 said:
One question came to mind was how is an illegal alien going to prove they have been living in the US five or more years ago and the Feds verify what is submitted is true . They are undocumented, may be using false ssn or id, etc. With the priority shift to felons, etc, I see no real advantage for one to come forward. The Feds will not be targeting the working "family member" anyway.

imo, The EO is poorly thought out.

That is what I'm thinking too. What are they going to use to proof their case? Why would you even risk coming forward in the first place? If you fail to prove your case you're going to be deported.

Meister · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

Henrin said:
Actually, I'm for no government. Still, US history has not been kind to this blatantly irrational idea where we try to limit government by failing to restrain states. If you want limited government you kind of have to restrain all levels of government.

Why not start with restraining the federal government? Why does it have to be the states you want to restrain.
It's the government of those states that know there own needs. The feds could care less about ....say...Wy., Id., Ak.

Ontologuy · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

eohrnberger said:
Think about it. The lower paying jobs that these immigrants are taking are the starter jobs that those starting their working careers need to get started.

I guess Obama must really hate America's youth.

First he dumps the vast majority of the ObamaCare costs on them, and then, does little more than increase the competition for the jobs they need to start their lives by adding what? 4-5m more people competing for the same jobs?

Yeah. Obama must really hate American's young people, and yet, he's also fooled them into voting him into office not only once, but twice. That's surely not going to just disappear in the coming years, as these people certainly are going to remember this.

Yes, absolutely true.

Bill Clinton's insult-laced message from the past is a good one for his fellow Democrat Obama today: "It's the economy, stupid".

Young voters aren't going to forget.

Neither are the older voters .. like the carpenter in his forties who was replaced by three wage-slave illegal aliens Obama just pardoned without requiring they pay compensatory restitution to the Americans whose jobs they stole .. or the warehouse supervisor in his fifties who has his wage scale and purchasing power plummet from the influx of millions of Obamnesty recipients.

Obamnesty is going to harm scores of millions of always-resident American citizens ..

.. And, they can vote.

For those who hadn't voted much in the past, oh, you can bet your bottom dollar that this will bring them to the voting booth in droves ..

.. To vote out all of Obama's fellow liberal Democrats in an effort to right this Obamnesty travesty!

TheNextEra · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

Henrin said:
You still have to concern yourself with those that get past your grasp. Prevention is great and all, but crime actually does happen and you can't have a huge gaping hole that makes enforcement problematic.

The people might very well love it, but if they were smart they would realize you can't be for the anchor baby amendment and immigration law at the same time.

It seems like you are trying to convince me you are correct. I agree with you in in regards to immigration. I'm just saying that you aren't going to get a majority of lawmakers that will remove that amendment.

However, even if you only had securing the border and enforcement of the laws on the books now would be a great help to fighting illegal immigration.

Meister · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

TheNextEra said:
It seems like you are trying to convince me you are correct. I agree with you in in regards to immigration. I'm just saying that you aren't going to get a majority of lawmakers that will remove that amendment.

However, even if you only had securing the border and enforcement of the laws on the books now would be a great help to fighting illegal immigration.

Agreed, if the politicians had followed through with the entire 1986 amnesty Bill, we wouldn't have had this thread now. true story

29A · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

sangha said:
If you want to know what some attorneys who are Constitutional scholars think, you can read this:

http://www.nilc.org/document.html?id=754

Interesting...however...

General authority for defered action exists under Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 103(a), 8 U.S.C. § 103(a), which grants the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to enforce the immigration laws. Though no statutes oregulations delineate defered action in specific terms, the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that decisions to initate or terminate enforcement procedings fall squarely within the authority of the Executive. In the immigration context, the Executive Branch has exercised its general enforcement authority to grant defered action since at least 1971. Federal courts have acknowledged the existence of this executive power at least as far back as the mid–1970s.5

8 U.S.C. §§103, 103a. appear to have been omitted since 1949.

U.S.C. Title 8 - ALIENS AND NATIONALITY

Parole–in–place refers to a form of parole granted by the Executive Branch under
the authority of INA § 212(d)(5), 8 U.S.C. § 182(d)(5). Under this provision, the Atorney
General “may . . in his discretion parole into the United States temporarily under such
conditons as he may prescribe only on a case–by–case basis for urgent humanitarian
reasons or significant public benefit any alien aplying for admision to the United
States.”7 Parole permits a noncitzen to remain lawfuly in the United States, although
parole does not constiute an “admision” under the INA. Individuals who have ben
paroled are eligible for work authorization

...and 8 U.S.C. § 182 doesn't appear to exist.

shrubnose · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

sawdust said:
My understanding is that Reagan and Bush worked with congress to correct flaws which adversely affected families that were granted amnesty by congress in 1986.

Obama has never worked with congress.

Click to expand...

He's a terrible president.

You've got it backwards. The G-nO-P has never worked with Obama since he was 1st elected to the White House.

I predict that the GOP will have no success overturning any of Obama's actions and their efforts to do so will hurt the GOP in future elections.

eohrnberger · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

TheNextEra said:
This falls along the same lines of "The government should get out of marriage". While it sounds like a good slogan, the reality is the government is never going to get out of marriage and you aren't going to ever see an electable candidate say "Get rid of the anchor baby amendment". It simply isn't going to happen.

The better idea is to concentrate on securing the border. Without securing the border, any other policy is pretty much irrelevant short of increasing enforcement of laws.

True. I don't see the likelihood of the 14th amendment being struck down, but that doesn't make striking it down any less reasonable or any less logical a thing to do.

You say secure the border, and I agree. Further, I say reduce the motivation for these people to come here illegally, and increase the motivation for these people to immigrate legally. If that's vigorous enforcement of the anti-illegal alien employment provisions of the law, so be it.

eohrnberger · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft said:
Political advantage...that's what changed.

When he made his previous statements, he was trying to placate his base because he didn't want to take the actions they wanted him to take. But now, he sees an advantage by reversing himself and going through with what they want.

The ends justify the means.

To me, 'the ends justifies the means' is just another way of saying unprincipled. Or have I got that wrong?

pbrauer · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft said:
In other words, he lied back then, right? I mean, do you think it's reasonable that he's able to understand the law now...but couldn't understand the law back then? Heck, it makes me wonder if he even understands the law now.

But, hey...if he says it, it's true, right? Even if it's not.

I believe he lied back then, he was interested getting the immigration bill through Congress and I think he thought telling the truth would be a detriment to that end.

Mycroft · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

pbrauer said:
I believe he lied back then, he was interested getting the immigration bill through Congress and I think he thought telling the truth would be a detriment to that end.

The ends justify the means, right? Lie when it suits?

Do you condone such an attitude?

TheNextEra · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

eohrnberger said:
True. I don't see the likelihood of the 14th amendment being struck down, but that doesn't make striking it down any less reasonable or any less logical a thing to do.

When you have a majority of people out there (including lawmakers) that are either uninterested, unable, or unwilling to get rid of the amendment, I do think it isn't reasonable or logical to do. It simply is a pipe dream at this point IMO. Do I think it should be removed or reformed? Yes. Do I think it is going to happen? Hell no. So I would rather focus on what I think we can do and can accomplish which is enforce the laws on the books and secure the border.

If that's vigorous enforcement of the anti-illegal alien employment provisions of the law, so be it.

I can completely agree. The problem is getting the politicians who are controlled by corporate lobbyists to agree. Hell it looks like even Rand Paul has fallen into corporate hands.

TheNextEra · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft said:
The ends justify the means, right? Lie when it suits?

Do you condone such an attitude?

It suits for the GOP in Texas in regards to anti-abortion measures. They flat out claimed it was for women's health, but then we had conservatives on this board say that they didn't care they lied as long as it made abortion harder to get.

Threegoofs · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

TheNextEra said:
It suits for the GOP in Texas in regards to anti-abortion measures. They flat out claimed it was for women's health, but then we had conservatives on this board say that they didn't care they lied as long as it made abortion harder to get.

Let it be noted that you didn't answer my question.

Dave Mittner · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

clownboy said:
Well, you have a democrat senate to blame for that. The house has put forward over a hundred bills that never reached the floor of the senate because the democrat leadership wanted it that way.

What I tired argument. You play right into their games by citing "hundreds of bills" without recognizing all the crap those bills contained. The House has passed very, VERY few clean bills on any issue, and Boehner has regularly used the Hastert Rule to sensor the democratic nature of the House by denying votes on many bills that have had bipartisan support. They prevent votes in the House and put crap in bills they know will never pass the Senate then bitch and moan about Democrat obstruction. And here you are validating the behavior by playing the exact role they want you to play. You're letting yourself be a tool.

ReverendHellh0und · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

sangha said:
If they had truly "worked with Congress to correct flaws" then congress would have passed new laws to correct those flaws, making the EO unnecessary and irrelevant.

The fact is, that after the immigration reform act was passed in 1986, Congress passed nothing to fix those flaws, which is why both Reagan and bush* issued EO's

Another point is that he has a new congress, the honest thing to do would have been to wait.

He's a douchebag, and an authoritarian who shat upon the constitution.

sangha · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

Meister said:
Just bringing out the fact that these illegals are going to get benefits that your messiah stated they wouldn't.
I was just informing the ill informed, seems there are a lot of them on this board.

Glad you have the honesty to admit that they are going to get the bene's.

Obama said nothing about them not getting anything from state govts and I did not admit that they will get any state benefits. I merely acknowledged the possibility that they will. Whether they do remains to be seen.

sangha · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

mike2810 said:
One question came to mind was how is an illegal alien going to prove they have been living in the US five or more years ago and the Feds verify what is submitted is true . They are undocumented, may be using false ssn or id, etc. With the priority shift to felons, etc, I see no real advantage for one to come forward. The Feds will not be targeting the working "family member" anyway.

imo, The EO is poorly thought out.

The following link includes information on the types of documentation that can be used to prove residency

Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) | USCIS

matchlight · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

sangha said:
It's not. The law allows the president to do that.

Specifically, INA § 212(d)(5) and 8 U.S.C. § 182(d)(5)

The Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the House of Representatives prepares the U.S. Code. The Code as printed on the OLRC's website does not contain the section you cite as authority.

sangha · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

29A said:
Interesting...however...

8 U.S.C. §§103, 103a. appear to have been omitted since 1949.

U.S.C. Title 8 - ALIENS AND NATIONALITY

I think you're reading that wrong. The Sec 103(a) that was omitted was the Sec 103(a) that was there at that time. Since then, other text has taken its' place

8 U.S. Code § 1103 - Powers and duties of the Secretary, the Under Secretary, and the Attorney General | LII / Legal Information Institute

...and 8 U.S.C. § 182 doesn't appear to exist.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens | LII / Legal Information Institute

on edit:The document references Sec 103 of Immigration and Naturalization Act and Sec 1103 of 8 USC (not Sec 103 of 8 USC)

sangha · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

TheNextEra said:
It suits for the GOP in Texas in regards to anti-abortion measures. They flat out claimed it was for women's health, but then we had conservatives on this board say that they didn't care they lied as long as it made abortion harder to get.

Depending on the circumstances, deception can be a legitimate tactic in politics.

sangha · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

ReverendHellh0und said:
Another point is that he has a new congress, the honest thing to do would have been to wait.

The govt doesn't stop working because we had an election.

sangha · Nov 21, 2014

Re: Obama's Executive Order

matchlight said:
The Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the House of Representatives prepares the U.S. Code. The Code as printed on the OLRC's website does not contain the section you cite as authority.

I've posted the links to the code in post #247

Obama's Executive Order[W:265]

Is Obama breaking the law?

Yes, by his own words he is breaking the law

No, perfectly legal

Doing same as Regan and Bush did

Not sure

Dont care

Go Fish

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Genius is where you find it.

Sophisticated man-about-town

Genius is where you find it.

Active member

I don't respect you.