Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6592
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 08 Sep 2017, 9:56 am

President Trump retains DACA executive order for 6 months to allow congress to create legislation regarding immigration. Good idea?

Is this Congress' responsibility to forward legislation?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20586
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 11:07 am

I think he should have just rescinded it, period.

The hypocrisy is staggering. Before decreeing DACA, Obama had said he didn't have the authority to do what he did. Then, when he issued his royal decree, he said it was temporary.

Hillary? Here she is in 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... tu50I9IMys

Why shouldn't DACA be tied to securing the border? If we keep the DACA kids and don't secure the border, we are asking for more illegal aliens. Just ask Hillary.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10740
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 11:47 am

bbauska
President Trump retains DACA executive order for 6 months to allow congress to create legislation regarding immigration. Good idea?


If, prior to writing his executive order, he had written a bill for consideration and found a member of congress to submit the bill, then sure. (President often present legislative ideas this way. Its called leadership.)
All he did was create chaos without taking responsibility for offering a solution.

He's not just an ignoramus. He's also a coward.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 2761
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 08 Sep 2017, 12:03 pm

Bottom line: it's immoral to deports kids who came over with their parents and have been here a long time. There was overwhelming support for the DACA because people saw the simple justice of it. And that is why Obama did something about it because the merits are so clear.

Why worry about the Constitutional question if the action is correct and Obama's order has not been overturned? I am not going to worry about abstract constitutional questions when people are going to suffer.

You might legitimately tighten up the program to make sure it includes only people who came over as kids and have been here a long enough time to become accustomed to American life...but deportation of kids who have been here many years is just wrong.

Kicking it to Congress was just a ploy to avoid political fall-out. My guess...is that he hopes that Congress will not come with s DACA plan or he will trade that...for border funding. Otherwise, he will veto a Congressionsl fix.

Another bad moment in Trump's presidency.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20586
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 1:05 pm

freeman3 wrote:Bottom line: it's immoral to deports kids who came over with their parents and have been here a long time. There was overwhelming support for the DACA because people saw the simple justice of it. And that is why Obama did something about it because the merits are so clear.


No, it's not "immoral" to follow the law. If you don't like the law, change it. We have a process and it does not involve a king nor royal decrees.

Obama had no right to do it. He said so himself.

Why worry about the Constitutional question if the action is correct and Obama's order has not been overturned? I am not going to worry about abstract constitutional questions when people are going to suffer.


Where's the fire? Is the union in jeopardy?

Inow, there is no emergency, no reason not to abide by the Constitution.

I am shocked an officer of the court would say "Why worry about the Constitutional question?"

Yes, why bother with the law? It's a trifling thing after all.

From such sentiments is anarchy born.

There is a legal doctrine known as "ripeness." The lawsuits are wending their way to the courts now. I'd be happy to see how they turn out. Let's have Congress do nothing and wait, okay?

There is no way DACA is Constitutional. The President changed immigration law by fiat.

You might legitimately tighten up the program to make sure it includes only people who came over as kids and have been here a long enough time to become accustomed to American life...but deportation of kids who have been here many years is just wrong.


Nope. It's the law.

Oh, and what of the "dreamers" who have committed murder and other heinous crimes? (please challenge me for examples--say they don't exist)

Kicking it to Congress was just a ploy to avoid political fall-out. My guess...is that he hopes that Congress will not come with s DACA plan or he will trade that...for border funding. Otherwise, he will veto a Congressionsl fix.


I think it's brilliant. Democrats will have to finally get real. We either have borders or we don't. If we don't, then we might as well stop paying taxes and wait for someone to take us over because it will happen.

Countries that don't control their borders are not countries for long.

Another bad moment in Trump's presidency.


Meh. Right away, he caved to Pelosi and sent out a tweet of reassurance to the "dreamers." He's all bluster and no mustard.
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 3101
Joined: 02 Oct 2000, 9:01 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 2:05 pm

I agree with Fate. Congress needs to change the law. I agree with Freeman, mostly, (though I wouldn't use the term immoral), how about it is monumentally stupid to deport people in which we have invested and who are invested in the nation. These people will never be safe until the law is changed, so change the law, do it the right way. If congress can't figure it out, it's going to impact a lot of innocent people, and I'm not only talking about the kids and young adults, but their families, their friends, their employers. But we have rules, and we should play by them. Trump's decision, seems to be a reasonable compromise.

(There's something I never thought I'd write)
Last edited by geojanes on 08 Sep 2017, 2:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 2761
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 08 Sep 2017, 2:20 pm

Likely a court is going to find that DACA represents a legitimate exercise of executive discretion in deciding who to deport. If there are 13 million illegals in the country, the executive branch can exercise its discretion to not use scarce resources to deport the lowest priority illegal population so that it can focus on other parts of the illegal population to deport that it places a higher priority on deporting.

In any case, this was not a decision that Trump had to make. No reason to disturb Obama's decision when it is clearly the right thing to do.

It's the right thing to do and Obama's executive order has a legitimate argument under the Constitution. Good enough for me.

Dreamers are not eligible for the program if they have committed any crimes. I guess you're talking about once in the program? Unless you have evidence that they commit crimes higher than the US population I am really not sure that is relevant. If they commit a crime, they are out of the program.

You can tighten up borders without deporting kids who had no say in coming here, have grown up here, and would be adversely affected by deportation. There is a reason why DACA is so popular. The justice in allowing these kids to stay is clear.

Trump had an opportunity to say that he is the president for everyone...not just white nationalists. He blew it. Again.
Last edited by freeman3 on 08 Sep 2017, 2:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 2761
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 08 Sep 2017, 2:36 pm

I guess I disagree that it's a reasonable compromise, George. I think they what they did is create a political chip they can play. They will hold these DACA kids hostage, as they leverage them to get votes for R.A.I.S.E. and building a wall.

Cynical. Machiavellian. Immoral. Not reasonable.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6592
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 08 Sep 2017, 2:55 pm

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/cartoons/cartoons_of_the_week/2017/36/-3-lisa_benson-current_cartoon_2017-09-07.html
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20586
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 3:15 pm

freeman3 wrote:Likely a court is going to find that DACA represents a legitimate exercise of executive discretion in deciding who to deport. If there are 13 million illegals in the country, the executive branch can exercise its discretion to not use scarce resources to deport the lowest priority illegal population so that it can focus on other parts of the illegal population to deport that it places a higher priority on deporting.

In any case, this was not a decision that Trump had to make. No reason to disturb Obama's decision when it is clearly the right thing to do.

It's the right thing to do and Obama's executive order has a legitimate argument under the Constitution. Good enough for me.


We don't know that Obama had the right to do this. But, if he did, then Trump has the ability to undo it.

Dreamers are not eligible for the program if they have committed any crimes. I guess you're talking about once in the program? Unless you have evidence that they commit crimes higher than the US population I am really not sure that is relevant. If they commit a crime, they are out of the program.


Right. So, just because someone is in the program, we have no way of knowing they are/are not a good, hard-working, law-abiding person.

You can tighten up borders without deporting kids who had no say in coming here, have grown up here, and would be adversely affected by deportation. There is a reason why DACA is so popular. The justice in allowing these kids to stay is clear.


Nope.

To me, letting them stay here without ensuring the next set of DACA kids isn't here in 15 years (the average age of these "kids" is 25) only guarantees more illegal immigration. We either secure the borders or we don't.

I don't care if it's popular. I care if it's legal and if it's final. "Popular" is garbage. Racism was real popular in 1860--in the North and the South. Polygamy was real popular in Utah before it joined the union. Lots of things are popular--like texting and driving--it doesn't make them good.

Trump had an opportunity to say that he is the president for everyone...not just white nationalists. He blew it. Again.


Whenever liberals are out of coherent arguments, here comes the "racism" card.

What percentage of the US are "white nationalists?" Who supports that? If you put them all in one Congressional district, I don't think they could swing it.

You've probably pre-ordered Hillary's new memoir and are counting the days until Kamala Harris can explain why she lost the 2020 election.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20586
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 3:19 pm

freeman3 wrote:I guess I disagree that it's a reasonable compromise, George. I think they what they did is create a political chip they can play. They will hold these DACA kids hostage, as they leverage them to get votes for R.A.I.S.E. and building a wall.

Cynical. Machiavellian. Immoral. Not reasonable.


No, what is cynical is the hypocritical nonsense Democrats are spewing.

As the cartoon illustrates, this was supposed to be temporary. DACA was not supposed to be a path to citizenship. Like it or not, it was a placeholder.

What is "immoral" is to pretend that Obama could wave a wand and make illegal immigrants permanently legal.

FYI: in our system, Congress passes laws. DACA, therefore, was not a law. Stop acting like it was.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10740
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 3:35 pm

Fate
No, it's not "immoral" to follow the law


Have their never been laws which are immoral?

Freeman is stating that he finds the actions that would be the consequence of enforcing current immigration laws to be immoral. He stands with the vast majority of the populace in the US, BTW.

If enforcing immigration laws against DACA kids is immoral, and Congress will not act to create a moral and just law... then the Executive Action taken by Obama was a moral act. Ending it without proposing a permanent solution that can be encoded in law is cowardly and immoral.

As for enforcement of an immoral law... where would you stand if you were alive in 1857 and a runaway slave ended up on your doorstep in Massachussetts? Would you return them to their "Lawful" owner upon request. Because enforcing the law must come before anything... Or take a moral stand for freedom?
The debate over DACA isn't that far from that issue .
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 2761
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 08 Sep 2017, 4:59 pm

According to the following poll--which I saw cited by the Washington Examiner--76% of those polled think that Dreamers should be allowed to become citizens or permanent residents if they meet certain requirements. Only 15% percent say they should be deported.

As for illegal immigrants, 70% of those polled said that they should be allowed to stay and become legal residents or citizens if they meet certain requirements. Only 22% wanted them deported.

I would say that Trump's position--and DF's--is pretty far out of the mainstream.

https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/u ... _v1_TB.pdf
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20586
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 5:55 pm

rickyp wrote:Fate
No, it's not "immoral" to follow the law


Have their never been laws which are immoral?

Freeman is stating that he finds the actions that would be the consequence of enforcing current immigration laws to be immoral. He stands with the vast majority of the populace in the US, BTW.

If enforcing immigration laws against DACA kids is immoral, and Congress will not act to create a moral and just law... then the Executive Action taken by Obama was a moral act. Ending it without proposing a permanent solution that can be encoded in law is cowardly and immoral.

As for enforcement of an immoral law... where would you stand if you were alive in 1857 and a runaway slave ended up on your doorstep in Massachussetts? Would you return them to their "Lawful" owner upon request. Because enforcing the law must come before anything... Or take a moral stand for freedom?
The debate over DACA isn't that far from that issue .


This is sheer jackassery.

No, removing DACA protections is not like slavery. Oh, and it's not like Hitler.

It just puts them on the same plane as the other 10+ million illegal aliens. Guess what? There's no pogrom against them.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20586
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 08 Sep 2017, 5:57 pm

freeman3 wrote:According to the following poll--which I saw cited by the Washington Examiner--76% of those polled think that Dreamers should be allowed to become citizens or permanent residents if they meet certain requirements. Only 15% percent say they should be deported.

As for illegal immigrants, 70% of those polled said that they should be allowed to stay and become legal residents or citizens if they meet certain requirements. Only 22% wanted them deported.

I would say that Trump's position--and DF's--is pretty far out of the mainstream.

https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/u ... _v1_TB.pdf


Nope. I'm not against them staying.

I'm against them staying AND nothing being done to end the flow of illegal aliens. Please, don't tell me how they're not coming. When Obama announced DACA, the children came . . . And they came . . . They flooded our borders.

It will happen again unless we legally end this.