It’s simply shocking that the New York Times Editorial Board would be so enthused, like school girls going to their first One Direction concert, over Obama’s executive action for illegal aliens, eh? Of course, the majority of legal citizens look like Dad’s at One Direction concerts, and as the details come out, our frowns will only get worse
Mr. Obama’s Wise Immigration Plan
President Obama’s speech Thursday night on immigration ended on a high, hopeful note. Mr. Obama, quoting Scripture’s admonition to welcome and protect the stranger, told millions who have lived and worked here for years, many of them Americans in all but name: We cannot fix your situation yet, but for now we will not expel you, because we have better hopes for you here.
A speech is not a solution, of course, and now that it is over, the hard work begins. Efforts over the last decade to repair immigration have repeatedly ended in failure, leaving the meanness of the broken status quo.
Well, if the NYTEB thinks Obama is going to work hard, they haven’t been paying attention for the last 6 years. As far as Americans in all but name, that’s a serious affront to all those who came here legally and went through the laborious process, as well as those going through it now.
Here’s where it gets disturbing
Now, though, there are reasons for encouragement, tempered with caution. Mr. Obama’s plan to register and give working papers to perhaps four million to five million people has rightly gained the most attention, but he and the Homeland Security Secretary, Jeh Johnson, have also declared a sweeping reordering of immigration enforcement. They are ending Secure Communities, a blighted program that used local police to funnel arrested immigrants to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In theory, this widened the dragnet for dangerous criminals. But in practice, it terrorized the innocent, alienated immigrant neighborhoods from their police protectors and encouraged — nationalized — Arizona-style campaigns of indiscriminate immigration crackdowns and racial profiling.
I wonder if the NY Times would be as enthused if Obama told local police to ignore legal citizens who broke gun and sex laws (more on this later)? Most often, the illegals were caught because they broke other laws, rather than police intentionally looking for them.
The replacement for Secure Communities will be called the Priority Enforcement Program, and it is meant to pursue only high-priority deportation targets. The local police will no longer routinely be asked to detain immigrants on ICE’s behalf — in violation of the Fourth Amendment — but asked instead simply to notify ICE when a wanted suspect is about to be released.
Law enforcement is being told that, when they catch an illegal, to let them go. I wonder if the NYTEB understands that illegals are law breakers, so police have the authority to hold them, much like with any other criminal. And federal law gives police that authority. BTW, since they came here legally/overstayed their visas, the Constitution does not apply to them. Do you feel better that law enforcement is being told to back off of communities of illegal aliens? This means that it will be much harder to catch those that are “high priority targets”.
Let’s flip over to the Washington Examiner, and see who those targets are
The Department of Homeland Security has just released new “Policies for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants.” Designed to fill in the details after President Obama’s announcement that at least four million currently illegal immigrants will be given work permits, Social Security numbers and protection from deportation, the DHS guidelines are instructions for the nation’s immigration and border security officers as they administer the president’s directive.
The new priorities are striking. On the tough side, the president wants U.S. immigration authorities to go after terrorists, felons, and new illegal border crossers. On the not-so-tough side, the administration views convicted drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, and gun offenders as second-level enforcement priorities. An illegal immigrant could spend up to a year in prison for a violent crime and still not be a top removal priority for the Obama administration.
Feel better about this plan yet? I guess the NYTEB missed, or, most likely ignored, this part.
Your logical flaw (this time)is that all laws are equal. The crime of raping a child is not the same as the crime of working the fields for 20 years for sub minimum wage. See the difference? Has anyone told the police to ignore violent crimes? Why would anyone do that?
Typically, when the debate devolves to “process” arguments – it’s over.
Can you come up with one legitimate, practical reason not to allow people in the states over 5 years, and parents of a US citizen, that pass a background check and that are liable for back taxes to obtain a temporary work permit?
By all means, let the right-wing extremists in the House pass their own bill and explain their reasoning to the American people.