Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Immigration Tag

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on January 10, 2015 13 Comments
Yesterday, the House Appropriation's Committee released their plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security, making it the last federal agency to receive funding for this fiscal year. The appropriation bill provides additional funding and reallocates resources to strengthen border security and significantly enhance immigration enforcement. The House will debate the appropriation bill next week. Several amendments to the House appropriation bill have already been submitted. In order to prevent implementation of President Obama's immigration overreach, amendments to the appropriation bill further restrict where and how DHS funds will be spent. This was by design. As we've reported, at the center of this debate lies United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (USCIS); the department responsible for processing immigration petitions. USCIS does not receive federal funding from appropriations as it sustains itself on fees collected from petitions. The vast majority of petitions filed with USCIS are filed by immigrants in the United States legally. Whether they are applying for an extension of their green card, changing their visa type, extending lawful status, or applying for naturalization, these petitions (and many, many others) are all processed by USCIS.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on January 09, 2015 6 Comments
In last year's budget battle, Rep. Tom Price, incoming House Budget Committee Chairman, proposed funding the Department of Homeland Security through the end of February. (DHS oversees immigration by way of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).) The idea was that if funding for DHS and subsequent entities were held until the Republicans had a majority in both houses, Republicans would be in a strategically advantageous position to enact substantive reforms and direct more resources to our national borders. Today, the House Appropriations Committee released the DHS appropriations bill. Next week, the bill will be considered on the House floor, making it the last of the annual appropriations bills for this fiscal year. Overall, DHS is slated to receive an increase of $400 million from last fiscal year, giving the agency a budget of $39.7 billion. As the bill currently reads, the surge in funding and substantial reallocations will be poured into enforcement agencies like Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) who are responsible for border protection and confiscating contraband, and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) who are the "round 'em up and detain 'em while they await trial" folks. CBP will receive an extra $118 million with the aim of providing more support than the agency has ever received since it's creation in 2003. Almost $400 million is allocated to border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology. Funding has been allocated to add more than 2,000 additional CBP officers to it's current force of 21,370. CBP's total budget in this bill clocks in at $10.7 billion.

Posted by Amy Miller on January 02, 2015 17 Comments
In a move to "make lives easier," California has initiated a driver's license program for immigrants who are in the country illegally. The program went into effect today, and has doubled the number of applications for licenses submitted to the state. From the AP:
California has begun accepting driver's license applications from immigrants who are in the country illegally. Despite near-freezing temperatures, hundreds of immigrants lined up as early as 2 a.m. Friday at a temporary Department of Motor Vehicles office in the city of Stanton to begin the process of obtaining licenses. The DMV expects 1.4 million people will seek a license in the first three years of a program aimed at boosting road safety and making immigrants' lives easier. Some applicants may receive licenses Friday if they previously had one. First-time applicants will receive permits if they pass a written test. They will have to return for a driving test at a later date.
This move reverses previous state policy which required "proof of legal presence" in the state of California before an applicant could successfully obtain a driver's license. According to the AP report, while illegals will be able to obtain a license to drive, the license will not count as official federal identification. Additionally, applicants are being cautioned to seek legal advice before applying if they are under a pending deportation order or have a criminal record.

Posted by Amy Miller on December 21, 2014 16 Comments
During my time in academia, I rebuffed a lot of garbage petition solicitations, but I never saw anything as ridiculous as the statement George Washington University students enthusiastically supported this past week. Campus Reform headed to GWU's campus with a petition demanding President Obama address the illegal immigration crisis by initiating an "exchange program." As in, deport one citizen, let in one undocumented immigrant. Crazy, right? Not to this student body! From Campus Reform:
“Please sign our petition for President Obama to deport one American citizen, in exchange for one undocumented immigrant,” read the petition. “Everyone must be allowed a shot at the ‘American Dream.’ Americans should not be greedy. Let us right the wrongs of our past and make another’s dreams come true.” “It makes sense,” one student told Campus Reform. “Like, I’ve noticed that there is a lot of like hatred against undocumented immigrants and it’s not necessarily their fault.” “Everybody deserves a shot and we shouldn’t rule anybody out,” said another. After some consideration, a female student decided signing the petition was best in the name of social justice. “If somebody were to sign up for this program and they were going to go through all the effort to become this one undocumented immigrant than I think that’s enough will power and enough desire, they should be able to come in,” she said.
Two-thirds of the people Campus Reform talked to signed on to this nonsense. Watch:

Posted by Amy Miller on December 16, 2014 11 Comments
While a small group of Senate Republicans were busy causing procedural chaos over the #CRomnibus, a lower-profile court case bringing a direct challenge to the constitutionality of Obama's "executive amnesty" was quietly making its way through the federal court system. And guess what---the conservative position won. Although the decision declaring executive amnesty unconstitutional came down within the context of a criminal case, meaning that we don't yet know what the courts would do in the civil context, the holding delivers a blow to those who have chosen to back Obama's disregard for the separation of powers. Via Politico:
U.S. District Court Judge Arthur Schwab issued the first-of-its-kind ruling Tuesday in the case of Elionardo Juarez-Escobar, a Honduran immigrant charged in federal court with unlawful re-entry after being arrested earlier this year in Pennsylvania for drunk driving. "President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional," Schwab wrote in his 38-page opinion (posted here). "President Obama’s November 20, 2014 Executive Action goes beyond prosecutorial discretion because: (a) it provides for a systematic and rigid process by which a broad group of individuals will be treated differently than others based upon arbitrary classifications, rather than case-by-case examination; and (b) it allows undocumented immigrants, who fall within these broad categories, to obtain substantive rights."
Most notably, the court shot down the government's argument that President Obama's actions were justified because Congress failed to act. They disallowed Obama's ticking clock theory, and instead redirected focus on the importance of maintaining the power balance.

Posted by Mike LaChance on December 16, 2014 20 Comments
Obama's immigration plan has been criticized by many conservatives as nothing more than a plan to create new voters for the Democratic Party. If that's true, which is likely, what could be worse? How about using taxpayer funds to do it? Daniel Wiser of the Washington Free Beacon reports:
Taxpayer-Funded Immigrant Advocacy Group Blasts Republicans An immigrant advocacy group that receives taxpayer funding condemned Republicans on Sunday and encouraged undocumented residents seeking deportation relief to solicit political support from young voters. The New York Times reported that groups including the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA) hosted an information session for about 5,000 unauthorized immigrants at the Los Angeles Convention Center. Immigrants received assessments about whether they would be among the millions who could qualify for three-year deportation deferrals and work permits under President Obama’s executive order. The event was also explicitly political in nature. CHIRLA executive director Angelica Salas reportedly blasted Republicans for “getting in the way of immigration reform.” A slide show presented during orientation for the session featured unflattering pictures of House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.).
Isn't it a bit unethical to use tax dollars provided by some Americans who are presumably Republicans to advance the cause of the Democratic Party?

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 13, 2014 14 Comments
The differing treatment of Ted Cruz and Elizabeth Warren pretty much sums up the state of implicit media bias. Compare these two headlines from The Hill regarding Warren's attempt to cajole the House into defeating the CRomnibus, with Ted Cruz's similar effort in the Senate. Warren made "her mark" and raised her presidential prospects: The Hill Elizabeth Warren Makes Her Mark
Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s crusade against the $1.1 trillion spending bill backed by the White House firmly establishes the Massachusetts populist as a powerful player in Washington. The freshman Democrat took on President Obama and her party’s leadership, and appeared to inspire an uprising in the House.... Peter Ubertaccio, a political science professor at Stonehill College in Massachusetts, who follows Warren’s career, said that this week, Warren demonstrated a better feel for the sentiments of her party than her leadership. “If she’s able to succeed in the Senate at the expense of her own leadership team — the team that she’s on — it will have the practical impact of moving the center of power away from folks like Schumer and toward her,” he said. “That’s pretty significant for a freshman senator that’s been brought into the leadership. It could also reverberate in the 2016 presidential race, which liberal Democrats are dying for Warren to enter as a rival to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
As for Cruz, according to the same author of the Warren post he's just the same old obstructionist firebrand he's always been:

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on December 06, 2014 51 Comments
Congress is under another tight funding deadline. Currently, the federal government is only funded until December 11. A spending bill must be passed by Thursday to avoid a government shutdown. Thursday, John Boehner held a vote that passed legislation rebuking President Obama's executive overreach on immigration. H.R. 5759 would've refused President Obama the authority to intervene in the deportation of illegal immigrants. Harry Reid indicated he will not bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote in his last remaining days as Majority Leader. Republicans are in a precarious situation. Obama has said, through his spokesman, that he will not sign any bill that defunds his quasi-amnesty. But Government shutdowns are ripe with contention and not the way most congressional Republicans want to wrap up 2014, after what happened in October 2013. Boehner has said he'll do everything in his power to avoid a shutdown. Currently, Boenher's plan (or at least the plan made public) is to pass a bill that would fund the federal government for a year with the exception of one agency: The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees immigration. DHS would only be funded until March when Republicans have control of the Senate and are able to pass substantive reform.

Posted by Amy Miller on December 03, 2014 9 Comments
Ask and you shall receive, conservatives---we're suing the President again! Texas Governor-Elect Greg Abbott is leading a 17-state coalition in a lawsuit challenging the legality of President Obama's plan to grant executive amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants currently residing within our borders. There are three main parts to the lawsuit: first, that Obama's Executive Action violates the power-limiting "Take Care" Clause of the Constitution; second, that the Administration ignored required rulemaking procedures; and third, that if allowed to go into effect, the order will "exacerbate the humanitarian crisis along the southern border, which will affect increased state investment in law enforcement, health care and education." Both Texas Governor Rick Perry and Governor Elect Abbott have experience dealing with both the problems illegal immigration presents to the country, and suing the Executive over federal overreach. Via the Associated Press:
Abbott said Obama's actions "directly violate a fundamental promise to the American people" and that it was up to the president to "execute the law, not de facto make law." Republican presidents, including Ronald Reagan, have issued past executive orders pertaining to immigration. Abbott said those were in response to actions by Congress — unlike Obama, who Abbott said acted in lieu of congressional approval. ... Potential 2016 presidential candidate and current Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who leaves office in January, also spoke out against the executive order earlier Wednesday, saying it could trigger a new flood of people pouring across the Texas-Mexico border and create chaos that could be exploited by drug- and people-smugglers.

Posted by Mike LaChance on November 28, 2014 18 Comments
According to a new report from FOX News, illegal immigrants who fit certain criteria set forth by Obama last week will be eligible for taxpayer funded programs:
Illegal immigrants to be eligible for Social Security, Medicare Illegal immigrants who apply for work permits in the U.S. under President Obama’s new executive actions will be eligible for Social Security and Medicare, the White House says. Under the sweeping actions, immigrants who are spared deportation could obtain work permits and a Social Security number, which would allow them to pay into the Social Security system through payroll taxes. No such "lawfully present" immigrant, however, would be immediately entitled to the benefits because like all Social Security and Medicare recipients they would have to work 10 years to become eligible for retirement payments and health care. To remain qualified, either Congress or future administrations would have to extend Obama's actions so that those immigrants would still be considered lawfully present in the country.
As Instapundit says, who could have seen this coming?

Posted by Mike LaChance on November 25, 2014 54 Comments
The Ferguson verdict is in: No indictment. The people who deserve the most sympathy in Ferguson are the parents of Michael Brown who lost their son. That makes them the biggest losers and I mean that in a sympathetic way. The second biggest loser in Ferguson is the liberal media which flocked to the scene and stoked racial bias. Now that the facts are in, they look like complete fools. I mean that in a non-sympathetic way. The third biggest loser in Ferguson is President Obama who made a hasty statement on the situation which opened with these words:
First and foremost, we are a nation built on the rule of law.
We are? Really? Watch Obama's statement below:

Posted by Mike LaChance on November 23, 2014 12 Comments
Wow. It's not often that I can say it but this new video from the GOP is really powerful. Whoever made this video deserves a promotion. The ad uses an audio track of Hillary Clinton criticizing George W. Bush's so-called "imperial presidency." Via the Washington Free Beacon:
An Imperial Presidency A new video released by the GOP on Friday calls out former Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton for her hypocrisy on the issue of executive action. In 2008, Clinton said the George W. Bush administration was transforming the executive branch into an “imperial presidency.” In 2014, Clinton said she supported President Obama’s decision to grant citizenship to more than four million illegal immigrants. Clinton unknowingly provided the narration for the GOP’s newest video. “Unfortunately our current president does not seem to understand the basic character of the office he holds,” Clinton said of Bush in April 2008. “Rather than faithfully execute the laws, he has rewritten them through signing statements, ignored them through secret legal opinions, undermined them by elevating ideology over facts. Rather than defending the constitution, he has defied its principles and traditions.”
Check it out:
“This administration’s unbridled ambition to transform the executive into an imperial presidency in an attempt to strengthen the office has weakened our nation.”
But that was then. This is now:

Posted by Mike LaChance on November 22, 2014 7 Comments
Remember those "intended immigration consequences" I was talking about yesterday? The word is out. Brendan Bordelon of National Review captured this exchange on CNN:
Illegal Immigrant Tells CNN She Was Inspired to Cross Border by Obama Amnesty “Did the possibility of immigration reform inspire you to come now?” CNN’s Alina Machado asked the Central American migrant waiting for a bus ticket on Thursday. “Yes, that’s right,” the woman said. “That inspired us.” “Now?” the reporter pressed. “Yes, now,” the woman replied.
Watch the video: Media responses to Obama's plan have been mixed but I like this piece by David Harsanyi of The Federalist:

Posted by Amy Miller on November 22, 2014 48 Comments
Today the House GOP sued the Obama Administration in federal court over the Administration's decision to make changes to the version of the Affordable Care Act that Congress passed. From CNN:
The one-two punch from Boehner marks a new era of tension between Republicans who will officially take over Congress in January, and the President who has signaled that despite his party's losses in the midterms, he plans to proceed with his agenda without GOP cooperation. After two Washington firms pulled out of commitments to represent the House in recent months, Boehner hired George Washington law professor Jonathan Turley earlier this week. Turley is an expert on constitutional law and has appeared on multiple television networks as a legal analyst. Boehner and other top congressional Republican leaders are also contemplating a filing a separate lawsuit challenging the president's authority to take executive action to give 5 million immigrants temporary status.
This move has been coming since July, when the chamber passed House Resolution 676, which authorized the lawsuit. Although lawmakers are already being criticized for not taking immediate action to stop Obama's executive order on immigration, there's a good reason for the delay.

Posted by Amy Miller on November 21, 2014 13 Comments
Last night, the President did more than bring illegal immigrants "out of the shadows" with his executive order. With the stroke of a pen, he made it harder for law enforcement officials to protect Americans from illegals who stick their heads out of the shadows to commit violent crimes. As part of his executive order, President Obama suspended the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Secure Communities program. Secure Communities required the FBI to automatically send the fingerprints of anyone arrested by state or local police to DHS for a cross check; DHS could then screen the arrestee to see if the person was either a criminal alien, or someone who fell under civil immigration enforcement priorities. The program was responsible for identifying and deporting hundreds of thousands of dangerous criminals who are here illegally and already in custody is no more. Amazingly, Democrats in Texas are celebrating the move:
“The existing misnamed ‘Secure Communities’ program is being terminated and replaced,” [U.S. Representative Lloyd] Doggett said in a statement to the American-Statesman. “With (the Department of Homeland Security) focusing on threats to national security and public safety, some immigration employees will likely be reassigned to higher priority duties. Future DHS requests to local law enforcement for release notification will likely focus on those who have committed a serious felony.” U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement currently asks that local law enforcement agencies keep people in custody for an extra 48 hours after they have posted bail or otherwise been cleared for release if they’re suspected of being in the country illegally. The program has drawn criticism from activists who argue it leads to the deportation of nonviolent undocumented immigrants, and the Austin City Council in June passed a resolution in opposition to Travis County’s participation in the program.
Having lived in Texas (and I will say I didn't truly understand the immigration crisis until I saw it firsthand,) I don't understand how Texas Democrats can possibly condone a policy that makes it more difficult for the police to control violence in border states. It's indefensible.
Accessibility by WAH