Image 01 Image 03

No, Obama Will Not Pardon DREAMers on His Way Out of the White House

No, Obama Will Not Pardon DREAMers on His Way Out of the White House

“The president takes the executive clemency power seriously.”

Even President Obama recognizes some Constitutional boundaries. Who knew?

Thursday, House Democrats petitioned President Obama, requesting a pardon for DREAMers (kids who would benefit under the contentious DREAM Act). The pardon would nullify any legal ramifications accrued because of their lack of legal status. DREAMers would’ve been brought to the U.S. as children. Their parents or legal guardians entered without inspection and settled without legal status, leaving their children without any legal presence. DREAM proponents often argue its not the fault of the child their parents brought them to the country illegally.

The Hill reports:

Democratic Reps. Zoe Lofgren and Lucille Roybal-Allard of California, and Luis Gutierrez of Illinois said it is Obama’s “responsibility” to protect participants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program from potential immigration enforcement measures taken by a Trump administration.

“We want the immigrant community to know that we are not giving up, we are going to fight for them, we are going to stand by them, we are on their side,” Lofgren said at the press conference.
In a letter to Obama, the proponents argued that the president’s power to grant pardons extends to civil immigration violations such as illegal entry, overstaying a visa and illegal presence.

“We urge you to exercise your Constitutional authority to provide pardons to DREAMers both retroactively and prospectively,” read the letter.

DACA granted a two-year work renewable work permit to its recipients — often called “Dreamers” in reference to the DREAM Act — in addition to deferring any deportation actions related strictly to immigration violations.

The White House responded, recognizing the power constraints of the Executive Branch:

“The president takes the executive clemency power seriously. As a general matter, we do not comment on the likelihood of whether a specific pardon may be granted, should one be requested,” a White House official said. “We note that the clemency power could not give legal status to any undocumented individual. As we have repeatedly said for years, only Congress can create legal status for undocumented individuals.”

President Obama’s refusal to pardon DREAMers is a bit surprising given his amnesty via Executive Order past. But a welcome surprise nonetheless.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



“No, Obama Will Not Pardon DREAMers on His Way Out of the White House”

…until he does…

After all, what’s one last thumb in the eye of America?

Well, the argument has been by the states fighting his amnesty grant, and I believe agreed to by the federal courts thus far, is that it is one thing to forgive, it is another thing to BESTOW RIGHTS AND BENEFITS.

So, it’s one thing to say they aren’t criminals, it’s another thing to grant them the benefit of citizenship, etc.

Obama can kiss my a**. O, don’t let the door hit you on the way out. What a piece of arrogant condescending trash.

WHERE is this man’s birth certificate? College records? Passport? All hidden… we know he’s got so much to hide. I wonder if anyone will ever reveal it all. If so, I’ll probably be dead, but I sure would like to see it….

Um, I don’t see anything in the White House statement that says he won’t pardon them. On the contrary, it says “we do not comment on the likelihood of whether a specific pardon may be granted, should one be requested”. So he may very well decide to grant this pardon. The statement merely points out the obvious, that a pardon wouldn’t give them legal status or prevent them from being deported.

It doesn’t point out, but surely doesn’t have to, that the president can’t pardon future violations, as the petitioners ignorantly asked. Add Rep. Luis Gutierrez, Rep. Lucille Roybal Allardm, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren to the list of dumb-as-a-post congressmen. (All of whom seem to be Democrats; if anyone knows of a Republican who belongs on the list, please correct me.)

No, Obama Will Not Pardon DREAMers on His Way Out of the White House

He’s a Democrat; he’ll do it but call it something else. Then when criticized, he’ll present some incoherent argument blaming the Republicans. Standard Operating Procedure at work.

… both retroactively and prospectively

That’s a pernicious new wrinkle. A “Get Out of Jail” card, to be kept until needed.

The concept of the Rule of Law needs a major-league boost in America.

Not to be TOO jaded…I believe it when he leaves…

This is in part why the aliens being brought in are located to predominately “Red” states. As with California the idea is to dilute red into blue with doses of fed welfare and food stamps. Cali did it with fed and state dollars. The problem for the Dems is most illegal aliens are concentrating in blue areas already. How to push them into the red areas is the new challenge and amnesty is the start. He will grant amnesty..

If you pardon a foreign National, whaddya got?
I don’t believe you would have a Citizen.
You would have maybe a pardoned guest?

Somebody here can probably expound on the value of a pardon applied to a non-citizen. Does it hold any water at all?

    Milhouse in reply to snowshooze. | November 17, 2016 at 10:17 pm

    A pardon applied to an alien has exactly the same value as one applied to a citizen. Citizenship is irrelevant to pardons. If you pardon an alien you have a pardoned alien. If you pardon someone who is here illegally you have a pardoned person who is still here illegally. A pardon cancels crimes committed in the past; it’s not a grant of citizenship, it’s not a visa, and it’s not a license to commit future crimes.

      Thanks Milhouse.
      Yeah, I still see a pointless pardon as they would still be subject to deportation as I see it.
      Pardoned for being here, but still an invader..
      But then, I just don’t know.

        Milhouse in reply to snowshooze. | November 18, 2016 at 1:45 am

        Being here illegally isn’t a crime, so it doesn’t need pardoning. The pardon would prevent them from being prosecuted for having arrived illegally, but if they’re DREAMers then they’re not guilty of that anyway, because it was their parents’ crime, not theirs. The only crimes I can think of that they might have done would be using fake ID. OK, so a pardon would mean they couldn’t be prosecuted for that.

This under-talented, malignant bozo is so full of sh-t, it’s flowing out of his big ears.

This is going to be a scary two months.

Bitterlyclinging | November 18, 2016 at 5:44 am

What else can you expect from a president whose ‘Fundamental Transformation’ policy was to invite the entire world to the United States, tell them if they vote, they’re a citizen, and promise them oodles of ‘Free stuff’ if they vote a certain way.
Caligula has found his equal.

“’We want the immigrant community to know that we are not giving up, we are going to fight for them, we are going to stand by them, we are on their side,’ Lofgren said at the press conference.”

This is why we need to be language absolutists. The left would deprive us of the ability to even express a concept by banning words. There is nothing wrong with the word “alien.” It derives from the Greek and Latin and simply means “foreign,” “other,” basically from another place.

They do this of course because they want to muddy the waters and elide the difference between those we’ve welcomed in and those who have broken in.

Do not be seduced or persuaded. Illegal ALIENS have nothing to do with the “immigrant community” and that is the whole point of the left’s campaign to declare the word “alien” out of bounds.

buckeyeminuteman | November 18, 2016 at 12:03 pm

These children may have been brought here by their parents and didn’t know that doing so was illegal. But, why is sending them back such a hard thing. Dems act like its a travesty to go live in another country. Besides, if you send the kids and parents back together, you’re not splitting the family up which is their argument in the first place.