Thread: Critics: Trump's Deputies Break His Cheap Labor Immigration Promise on Day One

And when I say no illegals in our school. Don't come back with "no child left behind" baloney.

That is meant for US CITIZENS children! Not children of illegal aliens...or "brought here through no fault of their own".

Gee, I wish my parents robbed and bank and I get to keep the money..."through no fault of MY own". Cha-ching!!!

The stinking government have left OUR children behind for far too long, and OUR innocent children have paid the price "through no fault of THEIR own"...over the push for children in this Country illegally!

We have paid the price for your corrupt, failed, policies for long enough.

They can go to school in MEXICO and wherever they came from. Not our problem! Get them out.

No illegal alien children in our schools enrolling in the Fall of 2017.

Originally Posted by Judy

From the title thread, quoted from his Phoenix Immigration Speech:


That was his promise. DACA Expansion and DAPA, the only 2 unconstitutional "unlawful" programs created by Executive Order by Barack Obama. Neither one are the DACA program now. This program has never been called or challenged as "unlawful" or "unconstitutional" or "illegal".

But please, don't let facts and details get in your way, CARRY ON!!

We all want DACA 2012 rescinded in legal fashion on the earliest possible date so they can all be made leave or be deported.

You're wrong. President Trump has stated in the past that he will immediately end DACA when he became president. Furthermore, he has personally called the original DACA unlawful and unconstitutional.

Why would you think he wouldn't if that's what he said?

I've never heard him ever say anything except that he was going to reverse the 2 executive orders the court ruled unconstitutional. Those 2 are the DACA EXpansion and the DAPA, not the DACA 2012. He's always treated the DREAMER thing a little different, a little softer. Why do you think that is??!!! Because it's not unlawful. That doesn't mean he isn't going to rescind it or let it expire. Even Sessions in his hearing was soft on DACA when asked about it. DACA 2012 is in a different legal situation. Doesn't mean you have to renew it, doesn't mean you can't rescind it. But if the current active program is legal, and there's no reason to believe it isn't under the rules of DHS and law, since it falls within the prosecutorial discretion Congress gave DHS on deportation priorities long ago, and you have 29 million other people in the country on a higher deportation priority, why would you focus deportation on 800,000 DACA's instead of the other 29 million priority cases to catch and deport? Why not just let it expire and avoid the havoc rescinding would cause? hope Trump rescinds it but if he just lets it expire, I'm good with that, too.

I guess I'm a little confused with the obsession over the 800,000 DACA work permits that are all going to expire shortly anyway, instead of the other 29 million readily deportables.

Why don't you explain that to me? Do you want DACAs deported before the 3 million criminals? The 15 million visa overstays? The 25 million with children on welfare? Why on earth would you want that priority on deportations?

Originally Posted by Judy

Why would you think he wouldn't if that's what he said?

I've never heard him ever say anything except that he was going to reverse the 2 executive orders the court ruled unconstitutional. Those 2 are the DACA EXpansion and the DAPA, not the DACA 2012. He's always treated the DREAMER thing a little different, a little softer. Why do you think that is??!!! Because it's not unlawful. That doesn't mean he isn't going to rescind it or let it expire. Even Sessions in his hearing was soft on DACA when asked about it. DACA 2012 is in a different legal situation. Doesn't mean you have to renew it, doesn't mean you can't rescind it. But if the current active program is legal, and there's no reason to believe it isn't under the rules of DHS and law, since it falls within the prosecutorial discretion Congress gave DHS on deportation priorities long ago, and you have 29 million other people in the country on a higher deportation priority, why would you focus deportation on 800,000 DACA's instead of the other 29 million priority cases to catch and deport? Why not just let it expire and avoid the havoc rescinding would cause? hope Trump rescinds it but if he just lets it expire, I'm good with that, too.

I guess I'm a little confused with the obsession over the 800,000 DACA work permits that are all going to expire shortly anyway, instead of the other 29 million readily deportables.

Why don't you explain that to me? Do you want DACAs deported before the 3 million criminals? The 15 million visa overstays? The 25 million with children on welfare? Why on earth would you want that priority on deportations?

While it is not unusual for you to obfuscate an issue, I don't understand why you're doing it on the DACA amnesty. The DACA amnesty needs canceled now. Along with that cancellation will come an end to renewals and new application acceptance.

I don't understand why you keep insisting the 2012 DACA program is lawful and constitutional. I can only assume you're using that as an excuse for why Trump hasn't kept his promise to cancel it immediately. News flash ...... even Trump has called the 2012 DACA unlawful and unconstitutional in the past. Call me a liar if you wish, but I remember seeing those very words on his website several months ago. Besides that, from what I can tell, you are very much a minority in that position. To my knowledge every single Republican in the U.S. Congress thinks the 2012 DACA is illegal and unconstitutional as does most conservatives in the country. Just because you read somewhere that one or two folks, maybe even a liberal judge, thinks the program is lawful and constitutional doesn't actually make it so. Geez, even Senator's John McCain and Lindsey Graham have been quoted as saying the program is unlawful and unconstitutional (both support legalizing DACA illegals).

No need to be "confused" with my obsession over the DACA amnesty program!! Where illegal alien amnesty is concerned, I'm an equal opportunity hater. Yes, I hate all illegal alien amnesty programs. The one is currently active and it needs to end now!

I think it's obvious to most folks that the 2012 DACA program has not been cancelled because the Trump administration is waiting for the U.S. Congress to come up with a legislative amnesty fix for the so-called Dreamers. Yes, I'm saying Trump and the U.S. Congress want a permanent legalization program for the DACA illegals. Is that what you want, a more permanent solution that includes amnesty for the DACA illegals? If we put them on a path to citizenship, they'll eventually apply for the legalization of their parents, grandparents, siblings, aunts, and uncles. For every illegal DACA we turn into a citizen, they could eventually be responsible for the legal entry and eventual citizenship of 5-10 more.

There is no logical reasoning for continuing the DACA amnesty unless there is a plan to replace it with something more permanent. A stroke of a pen could end this amnesty today! Instead of making excuses for why the program hasn't been cancelled, we should be demanding its immediate cancellation.

I see, so it's not about deportation priority for you it's about fear of amnesty by the Congress.

Originally Posted by Judy

I see, so it's not about deportation priority for you it's about fear of amnesty by the Congress.

An amnesty means there will be no deportation for those folks, ever. Not only that, an eventual path to citizenship for the DACA illegals will just be the beginning trickle of an eventual wave. Once they become citizens or lawful permanent residents, they can then petition for the entry of their relatives. Once those relatives gain citizenship or lawful permanent residence ..... well, you know the rest of the story. Produce legislation that ends chain migration and then maybe we'll have a negotiating starting point. Until that threat is removed, we must fight any and all amnesties with everything we have!

You're right, I'm not that concerned about where the may fall on the deportation priority list. I'm not going to lose sleep over 800,000 folks in a country of 320+ million. What I'm concerned about is the huge mass of folks that will most certainly follow.

"Chain Migration refers to the endless chains of foreign nationals who are allowed to immigrate to the United States because citizens and lawful permanent residents are allowed to sponsor their non-nuclear family members."

https://www.numbersusa.com/solutions/end-chain-migration

Is there some reason you believe a Republican controlled US House of Representatives is going to construct or pass an amnesty bill? The Senate might because our margins there are so small and we have several Republican amnesty lovers there, 4 that I can think of, Flake, McCain, Rubio and Graham and some others who are sympathetic to the "DREAMERS".

But the US House of Representatives with still a huge margin should be safe against an amnesty bill, even for DACAs and DREAMERS. They killed the DREAM ACT, so why is everyone so concerned that Congress will pass an amnesty for DACA's? Can they not be trusted? Are they breaking promises? Are they deceiving our party and voters?!! Because if this is true and there is reason for concern here, this should be the huge news and the focus of our attention. Right?!

obama's unconstitutional action..DACA, DAPA...

"Infamously, in early 2014 after Congress had refused to pass his mass amnesty guest worker bill (S. 744), then-President Obama told his Cabinet he would implement his immigration agenda on his own despite the Constitution vesting immigration authority in Congress. Telling his Cabinet officials he was “not just going to be waiting for legislation,” Obama declared, “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone, and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions.” (See FAIR Legislative Update, Jan. 22, 2014) After that, Obama attempted to expand his unconstitutional Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) amnesty program and implement a new one for the illegal alien parents of American citizen children, called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA). Those amnesty programs were blocked by Federal Judge Andrew Hanen and upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals before the Supreme Court split on the issue (meaning the injunction stayed in place). Undeterred, Obama took more unilateral action to gut interior enforcement, using his “pen” to end the successful Secure Communities enforcement program and replace it with the weaker “Priorities Enforcement Program” that exempt nearly 90% of illegal aliens from fear of deportation."
http://www.fairus.org/legislative-up...te-1-24-2017#1

Yes, those are the 2 illegal ones, DACA Expansion in 2014 and DAPA in 2014. The DACA in place now is an earlier one implemented in 2012. I think Romney said in 2012 that he would honor the DACAs.

I'm opposed to DACA on all levels. I'm opposed to all illegal immigration. I just see this difference legally between the 2 orders of 2014 that were blocked by the courts and the earlier one of 2012 that no one did anything about and our candidate for President said he would honor at the time. Whether legal or illegal, Trump can rescind it or let it expire. Either way. My preference is rescission.

Romney Says He Would Honor Immigration Reprieves Granted by Obama

By Julia Preston
October 2, 2012 1:40 pm

Responding to pressure from Latino groups to clarify his immigration views, Mitt Romney told The Denver Post late Monday that he would not cancel temporary reprieves from deportation that President Obama is granting to hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants.

“The people who have received the special visa that the president has put in place, which is a two-year visa, should expect that the visa would continue to be valid,” Mr. Romney said in an interview aboard his campaign bus two days before he meets Mr. Obama in a debate in Denver.

“I’m not going to take something that they’ve purchased,” he said. He added, “Before those visas have expired, we will have the full immigration reform plan that I’ve proposed.”

It was unclear what Mr. Romney meant when he called the deferrals “something that they’ve purchased,” but he may have been referring to the $465 application fee, which is steep for many immigrant families. The program is financed by the fees.

As he returned to Colorado, where Latino voters could help decide who carries the battleground state, Mr. Romney had been repeatedly pressed about his approach to the Obama administration’s program, which gives two-year deferrals of deportation to young undocumented immigrants who were brought to this country as children.

Despite repeated questions at a Sept. 19 town hall meeting in Miami broadcast by Univision, a Spanish-language network, Mr. Romney declined to say whether he would continue the program, which has been highly popular in Latino and immigrant communities. He did say he would not support any mass roundup and deportation of illegal immigrants.

In the Denver Post interview, Mr. Romney did not fill in new details about the reform plan he would propose, or say how he would steer it through Congress, where there is a partisan stalemate on the issue.

Mr. Romney’s statement seemed likely to play well among Latinos in Colorado, who have been turning out by the thousands for legal counseling sessions about the deferrals. Many undocumented immigrants have said they are holding back from applying for the program until after the Nov. 6 elections, because they fear that Mr. Romney would halt it if he were elected.

Young immigrants had praise but also some skepticism. “We think it is important that Governor Romney said that people who have already received their deferred action permits will be able to keep them,” said Lorella Praeli, a leader of the United We Dream Network, a nationwide group. “However, it is still not clear whether he is intending to allow those of us who have not applied yet to continue to apply.”

Many immigration policy analysts noted a conspicuous error in Mr. Romney’s choice of words, which suggested a misunderstanding about basic terms of the debate. Mr. Obama’s program, which he put in place by executive directive, does not confer any visas or legal status. The program, known as deferred action, suspends deportations only on a case-by-case basis.

“It is disturbing that he does not know the difference between a visa and deferred action,” said Margaret Stock, a retired Army lieutenant colonel who is an immigration lawyer in Alaska and a Republican. “Nobody got a visa through this program. That would have required Congressional action.”

“This is Immigration Law 101,” Ms. Stock said. “It looks like a major fumble by whoever is advising him on immigration.”

Since taking hard-line positions during the Republican nominating contests, Mr. Romney has moderated his position, saying he could support legislation to give permanent resident visas, known as green cards, to young immigrants who serve in the military. Still, polls suggest that Mr. Obama had far broader support among Latinos than Mr. Romney.

More than 100,000 immigrants have applied for deferrals, a number that officials say is increasing steadily. As many as 1.2 million immigrants could be immediately eligible.

https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...nted-by-obama/

Obama attempted to expand his unconstitutional Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) amnesty program and implement a new one for the illegal alien parents of American citizen children, called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA)

DACA IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL PERIOD even before expansion. Even lindsey graham believes daca is unconstitutional.