Only Voters Can Hold Obama Accountable for Illegal Amnesty Policy

[Charles_Main]

Ah good, you decided to show your true colors.. . now stay with it, you can do it

As a Republican, I have always supported sensible immigrant reform. BHO and MR both do as well. Yes, I support this.

Now, if you are suggesting I am not a far right critter, WOW! guess what?

Romney used to support sensible immigration reform. Since running for the current GOP nomination, not so much.

He just Playing to the Far Right, He will move back to his Normal Center is he wins. I would guess. No Reason to believe he is actually as to the Right as he is trying to come off now. His Record is that of a rather Moderate, Even Liberal Republican.

Liberals should be over joyed right now, even if they lose, a Relatively Moderate Liberal Republican will be in the WH.

Problem is Obama is so to the Left, they have to try and Paint this Moderate liberal Republican as a right wing Extremist, and I just don't think people are going to buy it.

 

[Jackson]

snip:

66 2 351

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

email articleprint article
send a tip by ken klukowski 15 hours ago 135post a comment
president obama’s new amnesty policy regarding illegal aliens violates the law. But there’s probably no route to trump it either in congress or in court, so the only recourse is for the american people to trump it by electing a new president.
Obama’s actions on granting backdoor amnesty fall into two different stages. Each is illegal for different reasons. However, occasionally situations can arise in our constitutional system where there is a “right without a remedy,” where people’s rights are being violated but there’s nothing a court can do about it. That’s what’s happening here.

Although the details are still unclear, according to reports obama’s new policy will be not to deport illegal aliens if they (1) were brought to america before age 16, (2) have not yet reached age 30, (3) have no criminal record, (4) have graduated from high school, and (5) are either pursuing college or serving in the military. Aliens meeting all five criteria can be issued work visas and won’t be deported.

The argument obama is using is that prosecutorial discretion gives the executive branch sole discretion to determining which cases to allocate resources to, so they can decide which aliens to deport. One problem with that argument is that there’s a difference between deciding case-by-case which ones to go after, versus making a policy of not going after anyone in a very broad category. Another is that such discretion doesn’t in any way extend to issuing work visas.

Commentators are already talking about lawsuits. There are two parts to this policy, and neither can be challenged in court.

The first part consists of the president’s speech and any executive orders he makes pursuant to that speech. (such as ordering the department of homeland security (dhs) to stop deportations.)

no one can sue over those, because there’s no right of action in federal court over presidential speeches or orders. (unless, perhaps, if a president issues an order directly against a specific person or organization, which is not the case here.) you must cite to some constitutional provision or federal statute that empowers you to take an issue to court.

A right of action will be created when dhs secretary janet napolitano acts on obama’s order by creating regulations for issuing the work permits and stopping deportations. The administration procedure act (apa) creates a cause of action for any regulation that is “contrary to law.” these new lawless rules and regulations certainly qualify.

However, you probably still can’t have a lawsuit because no one has standing. In order to have standing to sue in federal court, a plaintiff must assert a personal injury that is different from an abstract injury to the public at large; one that is clear and concrete; one that can be directly traced to the defendant; and one that a court can fix by giving the plaintiff what he asks in the lawsuit.


Read it all..
only voters can hold obama accountable for illegal amnesty policy

and we will!

 

[Pheonixops]

SNIP:

66 2 351

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Email ArticlePrint Article
Send a Tip by Ken Klukowski 15 hours ago 135post a comment
President Obama’s new amnesty policy regarding illegal aliens violates the law. But there’s probably no route to trump it either in Congress or in court, so the only recourse is for the American people to trump it by electing a new president.
Obama’s actions on granting backdoor amnesty fall into two different stages. Each is illegal for different reasons. However, occasionally situations can arise in our constitutional system where there is a “right without a remedy,” where people’s rights are being violated but there’s nothing a court can do about it. That’s what’s happening here.

Although the details are still unclear, according to reports Obama’s new policy will be not to deport illegal aliens if they (1) were brought to America before age 16, (2) have not yet reached age 30, (3) have no criminal record, (4) have graduated from high school, and (5) are either pursuing college or serving in the military. Aliens meeting all five criteria can be issued work visas and won’t be deported.

The argument Obama is using is that prosecutorial discretion gives the executive branch sole discretion to determining which cases to allocate resources to, so they can decide which aliens to deport. One problem with that argument is that there’s a difference between deciding case-by-case which ones to go after, versus making a policy of not going after anyone in a very broad category. Another is that such discretion doesn’t in any way extend to issuing work visas.

Commentators are already talking about lawsuits. There are two parts to this policy, and neither can be challenged in court.

The first part consists of the president’s speech and any executive orders he makes pursuant to that speech. (Such as ordering the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to stop deportations.)

No one can sue over those, because there’s no right of action in federal court over presidential speeches or orders. (Unless, perhaps, if a president issues an order directly against a specific person or organization, which is not the case here.) You must cite to some constitutional provision or federal statute that empowers you to take an issue to court.

A right of action will be created when DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano acts on Obama’s order by creating regulations for issuing the work permits and stopping deportations. The Administration Procedure Act (APA) creates a cause of action for any regulation that is “contrary to law.” These new lawless rules and regulations certainly qualify.

However, you probably still can’t have a lawsuit because no one has standing. In order to have standing to sue in federal court, a plaintiff must assert a personal injury that is different from an abstract injury to the public at large; one that is clear and concrete; one that can be directly traced to the defendant; and one that a court can fix by giving the plaintiff what he asks in the lawsuit.


read it all..
Only Voters Can Hold Obama Accountable for Illegal Amnesty Policy

It's not illegal, it's not amnesty, and it's not going to cost him any significant amount of votes. If anything it will garner him more votes and strengthen his voting blocs. The people who are having a shit fit and spastic reaction to this weren't going to vote for him in the first place.

 

[Pheonixops]

they have not stoppped dealing with those committing the worst crimes.

His Administration also has the highest amount of deportations as well, but some people want to forget about that fact.

 

[Pheonixops]

this last move was done under the law.

then why last year did he tell hispanics, he couldn't legally do it? hmmm?

Do you have a direct quote and source to back the above assertion up? Thank you.

 

[Pheonixops]

No, I'm saying you're too damn stupid to figure out that Latino voters aren't distinguishing between the two categories; they just want a president who will actually attempt to address the problem.

I think they would rather have a president that doesn't put the damned issue off for 3 and a half years so he can steal the glory with half measures rather than real solutions.

As opposed to one who doesn't support the DREAM Act, and who thinks they should all self-deport? Good luck with that.

LOL, funny and true!

 

[JakeStarkey]

As a Republican, I have always supported sensible immigrant reform. BHO and MR both do as well. Yes, I support this.

Now, if you are suggesting I am not a far right critter, WOW! guess what?

Romney used to support sensible immigration reform. Since running for the current GOP nomination, not so much.

He just Playing to the Far Right, He will move back to his Normal Center is he wins. I would guess. No Reason to believe he is actually as to the Right as he is trying to come off now. His Record is that of a rather Moderate, Even Liberal Republican.

Liberals should be over joyed right now, even if they lose, a Relatively Moderate Liberal Republican will be in the WH.

Problem is Obama is so to the Left, they have to try and Paint this Moderate liberal Republican as a right wing Extremist, and I just don't think people are going to buy it.

Romney is not a Santorum-wack con for sure, but he is conservative on economics and business without being crazy. He will be for a sane immigration policy. And I don't think he will be a warmonger.

I am voting for Romney.

 

[Pheonixops]

I just want to know how back door amnesty is going to help the Economy and Jobs...............

This is more of the diversion tactics the Divider-in-Chief is doing to shift focus off the economy, just as evolving on the gay marriage issue.

In the bigger scheme of things, was this really a necessity, a priority to stimulate the economy and provide jobs??

It's nothing but a piss poor effort to change the subject and a diversion to relieve him of his failed 3 1/2 prior years. It's purely political, this guy will do anything to get re-elected, anything but run on his own record.

It's odd that so many conservatives, not saying you specifically, always make that distinction between illegal and legal immigration,

against it if it's illegal but for it if it's legal,

but are you really? If illegal immigrants take jobs away from Americans, don't legal immigrants do the same thing?

A good question that will expose them for being full of shit and trying desperate to throw shit against a wall (a fan in their case)to see if it will stick.

 

[WillowTree]

I just want to know how back door amnesty is going to help the Economy and Jobs...............

This is more of the diversion tactics the Divider-in-Chief is doing to shift focus off the economy, just as evolving on the gay marriage issue.

In the bigger scheme of things, was this really a necessity, a priority to stimulate the economy and provide jobs??

It's nothing but a piss poor effort to change the subject and a diversion to relieve him of his failed 3 1/2 prior years. It's purely political, this guy will do anything to get re-elected, anything but run on his own record.

It's odd that so many conservatives, not saying you specifically, always make that distinction between illegal and legal immigration,

against it if it's illegal but for it if it's legal,

but are you really? If illegal immigrants take jobs away from Americans, don't legal immigrants do the same thing?

A good question that will expose them for being full of shit and trying desperate to throw shit against a wall (a fan in their case)to see if it will stick.

A very good question indeed.. and the answer is that LEGAL immigrants are Americans.. illegals are from some other country and are not Americans..

 

[Dick Tuck]

So when did congress allocate the funding to apprehend, detain, give due process, and deport 10 million plus people?

 

[Pheonixops]

Poor Willow. Don't worry, the GOP will still get uneducated white people to vote for them. But even though there are plenty of those, it still won't make up for Romney's deficit among Latinos and women.

 

[Pheonixops]

Rule by Proclamation & Decree is not what our Nation is about. In fact, it's exactly why our Founding Fathers fought a Revolutionary War. This is bad for all Americans. Those cheering it now, will likely regret it at some point. I do hope the Voters stand up and give this guy the boot in November. But we'll see i guess.

US presidents have issued executive orders since 1789.

 

[Pheonixops]

How long before these work permits come in and these illegals can walk up to the unemployment window? Hope it is October.

How many months does one have to work before they qualify for unemployment benefits?

 

[Charles_Main]

Romney used to support sensible immigration reform. Since running for the current GOP nomination, not so much.

He just Playing to the Far Right, He will move back to his Normal Center is he wins. I would guess. No Reason to believe he is actually as to the Right as he is trying to come off now. His Record is that of a rather Moderate, Even Liberal Republican.

Liberals should be over joyed right now, even if they lose, a Relatively Moderate Liberal Republican will be in the WH.

Problem is Obama is so to the Left, they have to try and Paint this Moderate liberal Republican as a right wing Extremist, and I just don't think people are going to buy it.

Romney is not a Santorum-wack con for sure, but he is conservative on economics and business without being crazy. He will be for a sane immigration policy. And I don't think he will be a warmonger.

I am voting for Romney.

I have to agree, between the 2 choices Romney is clearly the more Moderate Rational Choice.

I have no illusions he will be some great Leader, But I think he will fuck things up less than the current guy.

 

[Charles_Main]

How long before these work permits come in and these illegals can walk up to the unemployment window? Hope it is October.

How many months does one have to work before they qualify for unemployment benefits?

Depends on the State. Here in Michigan it's 26 weeks or some arbitrary Monetary Amount I don't know off hand.

 

[Rinata]

It's not illegal and Romney will support and expand it when elected.

This issue is finally over for 95% of America, and we can move forward.

knock it off Jake, now you're sounding like a idiot broken record

you're not fooling anyone

No, Steph. That would be you and Willow and naturegirl. The three of you should form a group and call it, "The new 3 stooges". There isn't an ounce of sense among you.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Congress can and should impeach obozo over this so don't tell me only voters can fight obozo's executive order legalzing illegals.

 

[Stephanie]

It's not illegal and Romney will support and expand it when elected.

This issue is finally over for 95% of America, and we can move forward.

knock it off Jake, now you're sounding like a idiot broken record

you're not fooling anyone

No, Steph. That would be you and Willow and naturegirl. The three of you should form a group and call it, "The new 3 stooges". There isn't an ounce of sense among you.

well it's good to see you spreading your hate around...not that it matters what you think of anybody.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Steph, the hate is being thrown out by Romney, who will not cut BHO's executive order on this issue.

Thank heavens it has been put to rest forever.

 

[Moonglow]

It's odd that so many conservatives, not saying you specifically, always make that distinction between illegal and legal immigration,

against it if it's illegal but for it if it's legal,

but are you really? If illegal immigrants take jobs away from Americans, don't legal immigrants do the same thing?

A good question that will expose them for being full of shit and trying desperate to throw shit against a wall (a fan in their case)to see if it will stick.

A very good question indeed.. and the answer is that LEGAL immigrants are Americans.. illegals are from some other country and are not Americans..

Some are from North, South and Central America, so they are indeed Americans.