Thread: Column: Trump said DACA is illegal. But is it?

Column: Trump said DACA is illegal. But is it?

Jonathan T. Weinberg Published 12:02 a.m. ET Oct. 5, 2017

President Donald Trump says that he has “great love” for the Dreamers.

There’s no reason why he shouldn’t: They’re young people who were brought to this country as children, grew up here, have clean criminal records, and either are currently in school, have graduated high school, or have served honorably in the U.S. military. Eighty-nine percent of them are employed. Nearly all are fluent in English. This is the only country they’ve known, and they contribute to our society.

Nonetheless, Trump recently sent out Attorney General Jeff Sessions to announce the end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. The president has invited Congress to pass a new law, before the government starts deporting Dreamers in March. The odds of Congress coming through, though, are pretty low. Many legislators are opposed to such legislation, or favor it only if it’s tied to other immigration-law changes that can’t get through Congress. The Senate Republican leadership, in particular, seems to have no interest in acting. So Trump’s decision to end the DACA program puts all of the Dreamers at risk of deportation.

And yet, says the administration, Trump had to do it, because the program usurps Congress’s authority and is thus unconstitutional. That’s not right: The president has full authority to continue DACA indefinitely if he wants to. It’s true that DACA recipients are here in this country illegally. They’re among 11 million people in the U.S. without authorization. But Homeland Security doesn’t have the money or resources to deport in any given year even 5 percent of those 11 million people. It necessarily has to establish priorities, picking and choosing whom to seek to deport and who to allow to stay (for now, anyway). That’s called prosecutorial discretion; it’s the same thing a police department does when it tells officers to pull over the drivers who are 10 miles over the speed limit, but to let by those drivers who are merely five miles over.

Republican and Democratic presidents alike have routinely used that priority-setting power to shield people who are illegally in this country, but whom it would be dumb to spend scarce resources deporting. President Ronald Reagan’s Justice Department, for example, gave that protection to more than 150,000 Nicaraguans who were in the country illegally, and to more than 80,000 Chinese. More recently, President George W. Bush’s administration did it for thousands of foreign students affected by Hurricane Katrina. In immigration-law lingo, that’s called giving people “deferred action” status. And presidential administrations have routinely followed the practice — explicitly authorized by the Immigration and Naturalization Act — of giving people with “deferred action” status the authorization to work, openly, so long as they’re here.

Under President Barack Obama, deportations rose to record levels (to the consternation of some immigration advocates). Obama enforced the immigration laws. But he also made the common-sense judgment, as part of his prosecutorial discretion, that it would be stupid and inhumane to spend taxpayer dollars on deporting the Dreamers, rather than focusing our enforcement resources on better targets. And his administration, like others, used statutory authority to give them authorization to work while they’re here. In extending that forbearance to the Dreamers, allowing them for the past five years to go to school, to work, and to contribute to our society, the president did nothing exceptional or outside his authority.

The Dreamers identify as Americans, and have never known a home other than this country. For the past five years, DACA has allowed them to be open and productive members of our society. Attorney General Sessions told us that government has to shut DACA down, because it’s illegal. That’s not right, though. If Trump wants to continue DACA, he still can.

Jonathan T. Weinberg is a professor at Wayne State University Law School.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opi...gal/106318328/

The Dreamers identify as Americans, and have never known a home other than this country. For the past five years, DACA has allowed them to be open and productive members of our society. Attorney General Sessions told us that government has to shut DACA down, because it’s illegal. That’s not right, though. If Trump wants to continue DACA, he still can.

They aren't American. They aren't allowed to be here under our laws. They're illegal aliens. They must be deported.

Trump ended the program because they aren't supposed to be here stealing jobs and educations from Americans any more than their parents who brought them. They ALL have to go, they must ALL be deported. We want our jobs back, we want our welfare back, we want our tax credits back, we want our schools and colleges back, we want our country back from these invading gypsy con artists.

Now get them out of here.

PERIOD.

And if anyone should understand this, it should be the DETROIT NEWS.

Judy wrote (excerpt):

Trump ended the program because they aren't supposed to be here stealing jobs and educations from Americans any more than their parents who brought them.

Not true. Trump ended the program not because he wanted to, but because he was forced to under the threat of lawsuit.

No one said he "wanted to". I said he ended it because they aren't supposed to be here stealing jobs and educations from Americans. He ended the program because they're illegal aliens and aren't supposed to be here.

I wonder where we might be on our issue of stopping illegal immigration if any of the other 26 candidates for President from any of the political parties had won the 2016 election.

Would we have $1.6 billion added to the Obama Omnibus bill for border security last spring? Nope.

Would we have 8 different styles of prototype walls being constructed as we speak? Nope.

Would we have Jeff Sessions as Attorney General kicking the ass out of MS-13 and Sanctuary Cities? Nope.

Would we have the RAISE ACT in play? Nope.

Would we have a reduction in refugees? Nope.

Would we have dramatic reductions in border crossings? Nope.

Would we have significant increases in deportations? Nope.

Would we have a $15 billion border security bill introduced by Senator Cornyn? Nope.

Would we have an end to DAPA and Expanded DACA? Nope.

Would we have travel bans from terrorist countries? Nope.

Would we have and end to DACA 2012? OH HELL NO.

Would we have NAFTA in renegotiation and on verge of termination? Nope.

Would we have an end to catch and release? Nope.

Would we have 20% more immigration judges with more being requested? Nope.

Would Sheriff Joe be a free man? Nope.

Would we have revival of 287 (g) program and Secure Communities? Nope.

Would we have at least 10,000 more ICE Agents requested in FY 2018 Budget? Nope.

Would we have an expanded and energized Border Patrol? Nope.

And this is a small fraction of the work being done every day by this administration with the limited resources available to tackle this enormous problem and doing so against all odds with almost no help from Congress, the Courts, our Major Cities, MSM or even many States. Even most of the world and the Pope are against US and this President in our quest to end the scourge of illegal immigration into the United States, once and for all.

I'm not aware of any lawsuits or threats of lawsuits that forced Trump or anyone else to take all these steps for US. It's just my opinion of course, but unless there's a Court Order in force, I don't think Donald Trump is the type of guy who does much of anything he doesn't want to do.

Anything Trump does won't mean squat to his base if he signs an amnesty bill into law. Signing an amnesty bill will forever label him as an amnesty President.

Are you suggesting that a Republican Congress is going to pass an amnesty bill? Why would they do that when their base doesn't want one?

Originally Posted by Judy

Are you suggesting that a Republican Congress is going to pass an amnesty bill? Why would they do that when their base doesn't want one?

I guess for the same reason Trump will sign it even though his "base" doesn't want it.

I don't think Trump has any intention of signing an amnesty bill. Why would he?

The plan was open the borders wide, sign up dacas 1.5million and dapa 5million (though they didn't get that far yet) and now with this 4million uncovered with half-amnesty permission to be here with work permits that weren't counted in stats. That is the 11-12 million they always claim are here. They plan on amnesty for them all, plus central americans are here to stay - only KNOWN criminals will go.

Think back when the news broke of trump's meeting with big wig Republicans before the election that leaked in the nytimes and he said I can be anything - he got the ok to run knowing/accepting the deal will be amnesty. His ego is such, he can say anything and do a 360 w.o blinking an eye.

Look at who is coming up with all these amnesty plans. republicans - graham is already talking @ amnesty FOR ALL! No longer happy with dacas - tillis, flake langford and many, many more. We always knew pence is onboard with that, ryan, mcconnell. trump is a frontman - he also will destroy every piece of wilderness land/waters he can so the rich can get richer too