Mexican Invasion
See other Mexican Invasion Articles
Title: Obama Admin Plans More Executive Action on Immigration
Source:
Free Beacon
URL Source: http://freebeacon.com/issues/obama- ... ecutive-action-on-immigration/
Published: Jul 22, 2015
Author: Elizabeth Harrington
Post Date: 2015-07-22 15:29:29 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 2357
Comments: 8
Proposed rule expands number of illegal immigrants allowed to stay in country A group of illegal immigrants listen to a Border Patrol agent while being deported to Mexico at the Nogales Port of Entry in Nogales, Ariz. The Obama administration is moving forward with plans to expand a waiver program that will allow additional illegal aliens to remain in the country rather than apply for legal status from abroad. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a proposed rule on Tuesday that would make changes to a waiver program created by President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration in 2013. The action created a waiver that primarily allowed illegal immigrants with a U.S. citizen spouse or parent to stay in the country instead of having to leave the United States and be barred from returning for three or 10 years, if they proved their absence would create an “extreme hardship” for their spouse. The new rule expands eligibility to a host of other categories of illegal immigrants beyond those with citizen spouses and parents. “DHS proposes to expand the class of aliens who may be eligible for a provisional waiver beyond immediate relatives of U.S. citizens to aliens in all statutorily eligible immigrant visa categories,” the proposed rule stated. “Such aliens include family-sponsored immigrants, employment-based immigrants, certain special immigrants, and Diversity Visa program selectees, together with their derivative spouses and children.” The waivers allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country while they await visas, and avoid a penalty under U.S. law that bars persons who entered the country illegally from returning for at least three years. An illegal immigrant who lives in the country for less than a year and then leaves is barred from reentering the United States for three years. Any time spent illegally in the United States over one year results in the illegal immigrant being inadmissible for 10 years. The waiver program allowed individuals to remain in the country and avoid these penalties. “It’s a very bad policy,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies. “It makes it possible for illegal aliens to avoid the consequences established by Congress to deter people from settling here illegally and then laundering their status by adjusting to a green card.” Vaughan, who has been following the issue for over two years, said the changes to the waiver program would increase fraud. “It is a slap in the face to the many legal immigrants who abide by the law, follow the process, and wait their turn,” she said. “In addition, it will increase the likelihood of fraud in the marriage categories, which produce tens of thousands of new green cards each year.” DHS said it is proposing the rule based on its “broad authority” under the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The rule would also broaden the category of those whom an illegal alien can claim their absence from the United States would create an “extreme hardship.” Previously, the waiver only could be given if the illegal immigrant has a spouse or parent who is an American citizen. “DHS also proposes to expand who may be considered a qualifying relative for purposes of the extreme hardship determination to include [legal permanent resident] LPR spouses and parents,” the proposed rule said. The agency said the rule is intended to “prioritize the family reunification of immediate relatives of U.S. citizens over other categories of aliens.” “The president should not be issuing executive actions that serve only to expedite the legalization process for those who have ignored our laws,” said Vaughan. “This legalization gimmick is undermining the integrity of our legal immigration system, and Congress should take steps to block it.” The public will have 60 days to comment on the proposal. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
#5. To: cranky (#0)
Lest we forget: http://www.texastribune.org/2015/04/07/texas-judge-denies-obamas-request-let-immigration-/ by Julián Aguilar April 7, 2015 A Brownsville-based federal judge on Tuesday denied the Obama administration’s request to let a controversial immigration program proceed while the issue plays out in the courts. United States District Judge Andrew Hanen ruled that his initial decision to halt the president’s November executive action — which seeks to grant deportation relief and a work permit to up to 5 million undocumented immigrants, including a portion of the 1.6 million currently living in Texas — was the right one. Hanen initially ruled that the White House violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs the way federal policies are crafted and how much input the public gets. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has called Obama's action "beyond any president’s authority," and says it "would inevitably cause irreparable harm to our state, imposing hundreds of millions of dollars in costs on Texas.” Gov. Greg Abbott, the state's former attorney general, filed the lawsuit against the Obama administration in December before being sworn in as governor. Texas is part of a 26-state coalition that challenged the executive action. Hanen blocked the measure in February, and the Obama administration immediately requested that the judge delay his own order. But on Tuesday, Hanen reiterated that wasn’t going to happen. “Having considered the positions of all parties and the applicable law, this court remains convinced that its original findings and rulings in the Order of Temporary Injunction and Memorandum Opinion and Order issued on Feb. 16, 2015 … were correct,” he wrote in a 15-page opinion. Hanen also admonished the Obama administration over an advisory it filed in March. That advisory told the court that between Nov. 24 and Feb. 16, U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services granted about 100,000 three-year deferred action requests. That came after the administration told the court the first phase of the program, an expanded version of 2012’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, was set to begin on Feb. 18. “The court finds that the government’s multiple statements on this subject were indeed misleading," he wrote. The Obama administration has already asked a federal appeals court to allow the immigration program to move forward while the issue plays out in the courts. That appellate court, the 5th Circuit in New Orleans, has not yet ruled. Oral arguments are set for April 17. http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/26/politics/obama-immigration-texas-federal-appeals-court/ By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter Washington (CNN)A federal appeals court on Tuesday denied a request from Justice Department lawyers to allow President Barack Obama's controversial immigration actions to go into effect pending appeal. The decision is a victory for Texas and 25 other states that are challenging the Obama administration's actions, which were blocked by a District Court judge in February. Tuesday's decision means that while the issue is appealed, eligible undocumented immigrants will be unable to apply for the programs aimed at easing deportation threats. "Because the government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its appeal of the injunction, we deny the motion for stay and the request to narrow the scope of the injunction," according to the 2-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. [snip] http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/17/politics/immigration-ruling-obama/index.html By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter Washington (CNN)A federal judge in Texas dealt a significant blow to President Barack Obama's attempt to make immigration reform an enduring part of his legacy -- and emboldened Republicans in Congress. U.S. District Court Judge Andrew S. Hanen temporarily blocked the President's controversial executive actions on immigration—announced in November—that were meant to ease the deportation threats to millions of eligible immigrants. The move jolted an administration that had planned to move forward with some of Obama's planned immigration changes on Wednesday. Perhaps more importantly, the ruling chips away at Obama's confident proclamation that he has broad powers as President to set priorities in enforcing immigration laws. Hanen did not rule on the constitutional merits of the case challenged by Texas and 25 other states. But he said that Texas was able to demonstrate an injury sufficient to give it standing to sue. He also said that the administration had likely failed to comply with procedures for the way federal agencies can establish regulations. "In laymen's terms, the district court held that the Obama administration didn't give the public enough warning about the new policy, or a period to object to it before implementing it, and so violated statutory rules governing such administrative processes," said Stephen I. Vladeck, a Professor of Law at American University Washington College of law and a CNN analyst. [snip]
No one has forgotten. The Administration does not care and will try every angle they can; they may even flood the field with new rules until the courts are too weary to put up a fight. What would a contempt charge do anyways? With out a Congress with a spine, this president will never face the law.
#8. To: TheFireBert (#7)
The contempt charge (if any) would be against the agency head, Jeh Johnson. The government appealed to the Circuit Court and lost. They could appeal to SCOTUS but might lose there. Or they can just go ahead and say to the judge, "You don't have the balls." We can only spectate. The administration talking about going ahead is not actionable. Doing is where is gets interesting.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestDHS said it is proposing the rule based on its “broad authority” under the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Judge Denies Obama's Request to Let Immigration Policy Stand
Federal appeals court sides with Texas against Obama on immigration
Updated 12:22 PM ET, Wed May 27, 2015 What the immigration ruling means
Updated 5:31 PM ET, Wed February 18, 2015
#7. To: nolu chan (#5)
Lest we forget:
Replies to Comment # 7. What would a contempt charge do anyways? With out a Congress with a spine, this president will never face the law.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]