Dems, ACLU Condemn Revocation of DACA; Trump Tells 250 South Dakotans to Leave Country

Following up on his successful ploy to own the long-weekend news cycle with his usual tactic of teasing an announcement to get everyone talking about it before it happens, Donald Trump announced today that he will end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program on March 5, 2018. DACA has allowed around 800,000 people brought to America as children without proper documentation to remain in the United States and obtain work permits under these conditions:

DACA allowed individuals who were brought to the U.S. as children or teens before mid-2007 to apply for protection from deportation and work permits if they met certain requirements. Beneficiaries had to be under the age of 16 upon entering the country; no older than 31 as of June 15, 2012; lived continuously in the U.S. since mid-2007; be enrolled in high school or college, already have a diploma or degree, have a GED certificate or be an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. military; and have no felony criminal convictions, significant misdemeanor convictions, no more than three other misdemeanor convictions or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety [Vanessa Romo et al., “Trump Ends DACA, Calls on Congress to Act,” NPR, 2017.09.05].

As NPR explains, President Barack Obama implemented DACA to fill the gap left by Congress’s inaction. Attorney General Jeff Sessions calls DACA “unilateral executive amnesty” and says “we cannot admit everyone who would like to come here.”

It’s not amnesty when young immigrants have to reapply every two years for a mere work permit and still can’t get legal immigration status or citizenship in the country in which they grew up.

DACA isn’t admitting any new immigrants; it only applies to those who came here as kids before mid-2007 and have been here since, getting an education and quite possibly working and contributing to our society.

And if Jeff Sessions thinks America needs to deport 800,000 young de facto Americans, Jeff Sessions hasn’t studied the workforce shortage that’s plaguing South Dakota and every other aging community in America.

The South Dakota Democratic Party says ending DACA is bad policy:

Today, the Trump administration turned its back on hard-working immigrant families and students. Rescinding DACA will force thousands of immigrants back into the shadows, tear families and communities apart, and be a devastating blow to the nearly 800,000 young immigrants who only know this country as their home. As a result of this cruel and short-sighted action, Trump and Republicans are choosing to further divide our country, create fear in our communities, and even hurt our economy.

Donald Trump’s actions today are cruel and bend to the wishes of extremist Republicans in his own party. Democrats proudly stand by the 252 DACA beneficiaries in South Dakota and believe that America’s biggest strength is our diversity. We will continue to work to fix our broken immigration system, and the most important step in doing that is supporting the DREAMers who are contributing to our nation’s economy – including over $12 million in South Dakota alone – and were brought to this country by no fault of their own. We urge Senators John Thune and Mike Rounds and Rep. Kristi Noem to act and support legislation in Congress to protect our DREAMers and keep our communities safe [Sam Parkinson, South Dakota Democratic Party executive director, press release, 2017.09.05].

The ACLU agrees:

Five years ago, the federal government made a deal with immigrant youth: As long as you pass a criminal background check you can live, study, and work here. Hundreds of thousands of young people came out of the shadows and accepted the government’s offer in good faith and worked hard to build their lives here.

Today, the government and President Trump went back on their word, threw the lives and futures of 800,000 Dreamers and their families into disarray, and injected chaos and uncertainty into thousands of workplaces and communities across America.

In South Dakota, over 250 of our neighbors used their DACA status to give back to our country in innumerable ways: they are our doctors, soldiers, and students. Our neighbors, family, and friends.

Now, the fate of 800,000 young adults, who call this country their home, lies in the hands of Congress. Lawmakers such as Representative Noem, Senator Thune, and Senator Rounds must decide if they are on the side of Dreamers and our country’s foundation, or on the side of the ugly forces that helped to end DACA.

While this is a hard day for the immigrant community and America as a whole, we will continue to fight. Years of courage, sacrifices, and organizing won the DACA program in 2012. Nothing will deter these Americans and our allies in South Dakota and across the country from continuing to fight on behalf of their futures and holding those responsible accountable [Heather Smith, ACLU of South Dakota executive director, press release, 2017.09.05].

I haven’t heard where our members of Congress stand yet, but yesterday, Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma said the United States “does not hold children accountable for the actions of their parents.” With Trump taking another whack at the Obama tree today, Senator Lankford needs to talk to Senators Thune, Rounds, and their colleagues to prevent such unjust punishment of children for parents’ crimes.

South Dakota Voices for Peace says Trump’s DACA announcement ruins the first day of school for many young immigrants in Sioux Falls. Voices for Peace will hold a Vigil for Solidarity for the young almost-Americans affected by this purely political decision this evening from 7:30 to 8:30 Central in Meldrum Park (1708 East 6th Street) in Sioux Falls.

Indivisible Rapid City is hosting a demonstration calling on Congress to save DACA this afternoon from 4:00 to 5:00 Mountain near the USCIS office at 2255 Haines Avenue in Rapid City.


58 Responses to Dems, ACLU Condemn Revocation of DACA; Trump Tells 250 South Dakotans to Leave Country

  1. Roger Elgersma

    No one has yet given me a good reason why they come illegally rather than coming in legally.

  2. Eve Fisher

    Well, it’s real simple, Roger – The Dreamers all came as children. They didn’t have a choice.
    Most of them came when they were six years old or younger. They didn’t have a choice.
    If they’re sent back to where they were physically born, they’ll be sent to a land they don’t know, and in some cases where they stand a good chance of being killed. (Which is why their parents brought them here.) They didn’t – and apparently don’t – have a choice.

    Repealing DACA is gratuitous cruelty. Mr. Sessions’ speech, where he repeatedly referred to the Dreamers as “illegal aliens” instead of what they were, children brought into this country illegally, was also gratuitously cruel, not to mention packed full of lies aimed to make people believe that somehow these children came surging across the border and wrested jobs away from American workers while being lawless criminals.

    In fact, Dreamers are more law-abiding than just about anyone else in this country. They have to be. To enroll, they had to come into this country before 2007 as a child; they had to have a nearly spotless criminal record and be enrolled in high school or have a high school diploma or equivalent; they have to pay every year $500 for a criminal background check. Even though most of them have jobs and pay all taxes, they cannot receive federal benefits such as welfare and food stamps or disability.

    Repealing DACA is gratuitous cruelty. And no, I don’t trust the GOP Congress to do the compassionate thing at all.

  3. Porter Lansing

    Make America Obama Again

  4. Donald Pay

    First day of school in many places, and students are walking out in protest. The Republican Party is killing itself, and that’s the only good thing I can see coming out of this. I’m sure some Republicans are smart enough to recognize that, but the base is so stuck in racism that the leaders have to refight the civil war in order to do the right thing. Do they have the courage? We’re talking about Mitch and Paul here. Gutless, heartless folks, but smart enough to understand they are done as a party if this doesn’t get switched.

    That creepy performance put on by Jefferson Sessions reminded me of Chucky, the doll inhabited by a serial killer. Hey, Republicans!! When you want to go against a group of people as American as the Dreamers, maybe you should have somebody up there, you know, who’s head doesn’t bounce around as unnaturally as if he was inhabited by a serial killer. You could just see the joy on his face as put millions of folks through more years of torture. Trump should fire him for putting on a bad performance.

  5. Porter has the 2018 political bumper sticker:

    Make America Obama Again

  6. W R Old Guy

    I listened to Sessions read the announcement on PBS this morning. I am appalled at the decision to terminate the program. PBS had the CEO of a placement firm on earlier this week. He said the number of jobs available is greater than the number of workers.

    Employers saying people do not want to work are part of the problem. He has clients that are used to having multiple applicants for a job and that is no longer the case. Employers are requesting qualifications that do not apply to the job. I.E. Assembly line worker. Installs parts on product. Must be computer literate and have a minimum of an associate’s degree in a related field, bachelor’s degree preferred. A combination of work and education will be considered. Starting pay 12 to 15 dollars per hour depending upon experience.

    He tells these type employers “Good Luck” because he won’t waste his time.

    The local convenience stores are offering the same wages and no experience required.

    I know it was Sessions’ voice I was hearing but it sure sounded like Junior Samples from the old Hee Haw show (currently on RFD TV). I was waiting to hear “Call BR-549”.

  7. The spineless, do-nothing GOP Party congress is the problem here, and I wonder if that is the real point Trump is making. The GOP Party pandered so much to its anti-immigrant base that it is in a lose-lose situation.

    The spineless, do-nothing GOP Party congress is now forced to either tick off the anti-immigrant base is fires up every election – thereby proving its hypocrisy, or put its money where its mouth is and kick out 800,000 America-loving productive and promising residents – thereby ticking off the business and religious communities – as well as everybody who is already not inclined to support the GOP Party.

    My prediction is that congress will do the right thing, mostly with Democratic votes, and Trump will move on to another opportunity to throw his own party in congress under the bus. The ending of DACA, like DACA itself, is temporary. Eventually the spineless, do-nothing GOP Party congress may even take up comprehensive immigration reform.

  8. How was that? I worked “spineless, do-nothing GOP Party congress” into each paragraph.

  9. I continue to think that the DACA should be repealed, but not for the reasons many on the left assume all on the right have. I agree with most of the policy espoused in the DACA, and think that Congress needs to take comprehensive immigration action. I disagree that the policies in the DACA can constitutionally be mandated by executive decree, rather than Congressional action. It essentially is changing several laws without Congressional/legislative approval. I think the executive probably has the power to choose not to pursue deportation the “dreamers”, but it does not have the ability to make them eligible for work authorization, Social Security, and Medicare benefits, which the DACA does. I don’t think that is good government, and think it defies separation of power.

  10. I agree with you, JLB

  11. mike from iowa

    JLB- maybe some more research is in order.

    Once an applicant files an application with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) and is granted deferred action, he or she will receive work authorization and may apply for a Social Security card. However, “Deferred Action” is a temporary program. It does not confer lawful permanent resident status or provide a path to citizenship. Beneficiaries of the program will be paying Social Security taxes if they are working but they will never be able to collect any benefits as “Deferred Action” is not a legal status. Certainly if the law changes or they are somehow able to change their status, they may later be able to use the credits from the time they worked but the program itself does not confer any sort of legal status. They are therefore ineligible for any benefits.

  12. Eve Fisher

    Plus, JLB, the US government does not fund DACA, the Dreamers’ own application fees do.

  13. When there was a Democratic President it was easy (and congress will always do what’s easy) to pander to the GOP Party base by ignoring the plight of Dreamers and forcing President Obama to act by executive order. That’s a win-win for the GOP Party congress with a Democratic President. Now they have President Trump who campaigned on repealing DACA on his first day of office. Obviously he didn’t do that, but now it’s a win-win for Trump to repeal DACA as he promised and to delay action for 6 months – pushing it off on congress to act. The chickens are coming home to roost for the GOP Party. With the Presidency and control of congress they own whatever is going to happen. And this is a wedge issue that splits the GOP Party base. It’s lose-lose time for the GOP Party.

  14. The benefits I am referring to are the ability to get a social security card and lawfully pay into the system. I understand there are potential disagreements about receiving benefits.

  15. mike from iowa

    I’m not sure what your problem is. Every immigrant that legally gets SS card pays taxes into SS and Medicare but cannot collect benefits. Sounds like a good deal for all Americans.

    Immigrants that have SS cards can get credit lines so they can purchase large items like homes or vehicles, just like all citizens.

  16. This is weird! “Democrats proudly stand by the 252 DACA beneficiaries in South Dakota and believe that America’s biggest strength is our diversity.”

    There is no record of anyone in South Dakota EVER applying for DACA: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Humanitarian/Deferred%20Action%20for%20Childhood%20Arrivals/USCIS-DACA-Characteristics-Data-2014-7-10.pdf

    Beyond that more than 50% of those who even apply for DACA are over 20 years old. You have to be 15 just to even apply.

    Who are these “wonderful” democrats trying to save?

  17. I do not disagree with the policy in DACA. I disagree as to how it was implemented. Laws passed by Congress says that these individuals cannot work in the United States and cannot get a SS card. The President cannot through presidential fiat change the law and authorize work status.

  18. Eve Fisher

    JLB, you are ignoring the simple fact that the reason President Obama signed an executive order implementing DACA is because the GOP Congress refused to provide, write, or consider any legislation concerning those who were brought into this country as children. If DACA had not been implemented, those children would have been deported. Congress agreed that they shouldn’t be, and there was nothing stopping them from writing appropriate legislation to help them. But they preferred to stick with their stated policy of making President Obama a one-term President, even in his second term. So they didn’t. Obama implemented DACA, and all the GOP have cried tyranny! Fiat! ever since.

    Now Congress has their feet to the fire, and the only one again that’s stopping them from writing any legislation is themselves. I would be laughing at the contortions they’re about to go through to “fight for the children” while simultaneously trying not to alienate the Breitbart crowd, but I can’t. It’s too frightening, because I have no faith that this Congress can do anything about anything, other than give themselves another pay raise.

  19. JLB I agree but the act of putting DACA in place was an even more egregious act sine the president had no authority to put this decree in place. The Constitution says “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To establish a uniform rule of naturalization.”

    This problem is what happens when someone takes assumed authority in hand and has hurt thousands upon thousands of Dreamers. Could you imagine if a US forest ranger decided his job was to enforce the speed limits on the state highways? Effectively that is what happened with both DAPA and DACA. It is clear Obama was given bad guidance and due to this is appears he did something that wasn’t simply un-Constitutional but illegal (which would be illegal anyway being that it specifically an authority given to the Senate and not the president).

  20. This DACVA only gets worse! I wish there was a word “WORSER”! It wasn’t by Presidential FIAT. It wasn’t even an “Executive Order”. Heck, it wasn’t even by Obama!!!!

    DACA was enacted via a stupid freaking memo sent by then-Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano to three other agency heads on June 15, 2012.

    There is NO DACA “law”. It was a FREAKING Memo!!!!

    https://lawnewz.com/legal-analysis/why-pro-daca-lawsuits-are-just-flashy-pr-moves/

    This is what happens when we trust the government. . . Gee, wonder how much better they can make our health care. . .

  21. happy camper

    So the question is should it go on forever or have an end date. If you support illegal immigration than you want it to go on forever, if you support controlling your borders than obviously it must have an end date.

  22. I don’t know what’s worse: Deporting 800,000 people that were brought to the US as kids and grew up here, or blaming President Obama for taking action to grant these innocent people reprieve when congress was too busy pandering for votes to take any action of its own. This is a problem entirely of the GOP Party’s making. Entirely. All President Obama did was go along with the GOP Party’s desire to kick the can down the road. I believe that most GOP officeholders don’t really want to kick out these 800,000 people, but they had so much success pounding the anti-immigrant drum and pointing at President Obama they are now afraid to do what they know is the right thing. Now the time has come for the GOP Party to show that its immigration rhetoric was phony – just like its anti-abortion rhetoric and just like its Obamacare rhetoric. They have complete control of government, and once again will not follow through on their draconian campaign promises. But once again, it will fall on the Democrats to do the right thing in congress because a majority of the GOP Party will not. Demagoguery is to ingrained in the GOP Party, and too rewarded by GOP voters.

  23. “should it go on forever or have an end date” it can’t go on. That is the whole point of the exercise. It is an un-Constitutional act put in place via a “memo”. It has no standing. It is worthless. It actually doesn’t exist other than as a written “memo”. It means nothing to nobody. If you were to erect your own speed limit signs on the interstate it would have as much standing as the DACA “memo”.

    The only suckers here have been the American people who “assumed” the last administration had actually done something and the congress, that neglected to do their jobs, who think the American people are stupid (which most are) thus the president is being blamed for a memo, not written by him, not written by Obama and not a law, edit, order or NOTHING!

  24. I bet if trump and noem sue claiming unconstitutionality, they’d lose. Obama is, and had presidential lawyers, as did Janet, who likely vetted these things. Congress was the culprit olesarge, and I understand ole’ jeff sessions was a vocal resistance to the bill on the table. if I have to study this I will to shut up republican knee jerks.

  25. Hey brainiac Rorschach: the Senate was controlled by the democrats in 2012 not the Republicans. It was 53 Dems to 45 Repubs. Had the des wanted to do something they could have.

  26. Donald, kids walking out? We need them to remind their voting-age, voting-qualified classmates to get out and vote next year.

    There is a fair constitutional argument to be made (JLB), and plenty of blame should be laid on the Thune/Rounds/Ryan/Noem do-nothing Congress (Ror). Still, I felt much better when a President who is also a Constitutional scholar took the extraordinary step of exercising his executive authority to fill the gap left by a failing Congress to take care of a pressing need and do justice for young immigrants who have no country to return to because they grew up here in America, as Americans. The current occupant of the White House is exercising neither humanitarian nor Constitutional concern; he’s just winging it and trying to shift the blame. If he really believed the policy was unconstitutional, he’d can it now, because why should Constitutional integrity wait? If he really wanted these young immigrants to stay, he’d use his office and all the smart people he said he’d hire to work around him to find a way to work around whatever concerns JLB may have. After all, he didn’t let Constitutional concerns restrain him on his other immigration-related executive orders.

    But since Trump can’t form policy or preside, since Trump only knows how to scratch out things that Obama wrote, Congress has to take up the mantle of leadership and pass a law that recognizes reality: 800K young people ended up in America by their parents’ decision, grew up here, and now are contributing to our society. Sessions is conjuring a fake problem and ignoring a real problem: no one is saying we should admit everybody, but America can’t afford to kick good young people out.

  27. Thank you for acknowledging my immense mental capacity OldSarg. Must I also explain to you how a bill becomes a law?

  28. hey, “Trump base is cratering”. its in a death spiral. it’ll crash in fury and whatever. spead the news. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYn3c7jXvCU

    Thom Hartmann at about 7:00

  29. Um, Hap, doesn’t DACA as formualted by the Obama Administration have an end date of sorts? As I noted in the conditions at the top of my post, DACA doesn’t apply to anyone who has entered since mid-2007. Thus, no border control happening now affects who got DACA from the moment President Obama authorized it five years ago.

    Applicants must have been younger than 16 when they entered. Under normal circumstances, one had to be at least 15 to apply for DACA. Thus, absent revocation, DACA would have seen its last applicants within five years, by mid-2022. After that, DACA recipients would reapply every two years, but there would be no one coming across the border to file a new application. We could build a wall and a dome to exercise complete control of our border and still show some decency and practical toward the 800K young people who already call America home and whose work we need.

  30. Rorschach is DACA a law?

  31. Cory, let us not dismiss out-of-hand the words of Jeff Sessions, which I thought were reasonable. Why do we have immigration laws if we don’t or can’t enforce them? Is it not his job as Attorney General to enforce the laws congress passes – at least to the extent they are constitutional? Nobody anywhere is claiming that America’s existing immigration laws as passed by congress are unconstitutional, so it falls on Jeff Sessions’ Justice Department to enforce them.

    And if we don’t enforce our own immigration laws, then does that mean that anybody who wants to come here should be allowed to self-select and just come with no repercussions? For every Dreamer here in the US, somebody decided to break the law.

    These are issues for congress to decide. It needs to get busy and write fair and enforceable immigration laws that must recognize that our capacity to accept immigrants is not unlimited. Until congress acts to clarify the status of those here illegally, it’s wrong to blame Jeff Sessions for enforcing the laws on the books right now.

  32. hey you guys, while sarge and kristie evoke deep legal thought, brainiacs I think olesarge growlz, do yah think trump is in therapy yet? “why don’t they all like me?”

    Do yah think he’ll come out of all this a better person, educated a bit about the world other than his? Do yah think Seoul and NK will be smoldering dumps and the rest of the world will be covered in nuclear fallout?

    Right, sarge says, “It is an un-Constitutional act put in place via a “memo”. It has no standing. It is worthless. It actually doesn’t exist other than as a written “memo”. Rush tell you that today?

    “The executive branch has wide latitude in using prosecutorial discretion. Obama understood this and used it–both as the Deporter-in-Chief (remember: this is the same president who deported more people than nearly all of the other presidents combined) and as the man who tried to protect Dreamers.

    try to stop bashing Obama and focus on the big pictures. ours and yours

  33. happy camper

    That is not an end date. These people were eligible now decide. The country voted for tougher immigration. In your link people are holding a sign: Sanctuary for All – Safety. That says it all. This is not how independent states operate. Go to some other country with your kid and call yourself a dreamer they would kick your butt right out of there.

  34. I recognize the importance of comparison to other cultures. However, America is all about being better and particularly more welcoming than other countries. Where other countries see threats and rejects, we see (and offer) opportunity.

  35. Donald Pay

    America is an exceptional nation. That’s an idea that happy camper and others of that mindset spit on.

    Our stated values attract the best of humankind to come here. We often don’t live up to those values that attract so many people, and some of us try to limit our exceptional country to white men only. Immigration hysterics has never in our history been about borders and safety. Never. All the people who have ever cared about who crosses our border have no had no concern about immigration, as long as they were white and not Jewish and not Catholic. If they were white and Protestant, then immigration was not an issue for those racists idiots amongst us. These idiots do not share American values, and they are the ones we need to ship out.

    This time in history tests whether those values mean much to those who blindly follow Trump, but I must point out to happy camper that the majority of people in the last election rejected Trumpism, rejected ethnocentric identity politics and rejected stupid immigration policy. The majority of people voted for a candidate who supported reform of immigration policy that was humane.

    If we want to discourage folks from coming, just reject our long-held values and adopt Republican hero Putin’s ideas of nationalistic ethnocentrism. The Hitlerism so prevalent in the Republican base is already a long way down the track as South Dakota leaders lick the rear ends of little men setting up anti-Muslim meetings in taxpayer-funded buildings. This lack of values and lack of leadership will lead to the end of this exceptional nation, and now one will want to visit, let alone live in a country of drooling idiots who vote for drek like Jackley and Trump. Why would they want to live in an America that has been taken back—back, that is, to the evil of race-based slavery, to gassing to death of religious minorities and to the destruction of all that is exceptional about America.

  36. Roger, if you believe in the law of this nation (and prevailing western nations’ law), and that may be a stretch; the law is that minors lack the mens rea, the mental capacity to commit a crime. In rare, heinous exceptions, or in cases where minors are permitted to partake in adult activities, think licensed (special training / certification – i.e., there is no juvenile court for dui), then those minors may be charged as adults. In the case of juveniles brought to this nation illegally it is clear that, legally, they committed no crime. Rather they, along with the nation’s citizens, were a victim of their parents’ crime.

    The question that our god-awful congress failed addressing for 14 years before the Obama administration acted, is how and whether to treat them in the mores and civil standards of this nation, or to throw aside the rule of law and treat juveniles as common criminals. In reality how do the juveniles differ from our ship-jumping or Canadian border crossing relatives of years past? Not by much; and certainly not by any measure calling for deportation.

    We should not quibble with the executive Obama stepping in where congress failed. Recall that President Truman ended segregation 6+ years before the so-called “Supreme Court” could be bothered to instill that “all were created equal”. (Truman integrated the military in 1948 by fiat, 6+ years before the “Supreme Court” ruled on Brown vs the Board of Education in 1954.)

    Consider getting on the right side of history; even if only for your grandkids sake.

  37. Truman ended segregation only where he had explicit statutory authority. Your exception proves the rule.

  38. OldSarg attempts to indict the evidenced claim in the SDDP press release that there are 252 South Dakotans approved for DACA by claiming there are no approved DACA recipients in South Dakota. Notice the date in the link OldSarg provides: 2014.

    In the passage I quote in the original post, SDDP links to this Center for American Progress analysis, which in turn cites the quarterly DACA reports from USCIS. Unlike OldSarg, CAP turns to the latest published data, the FY2017 Q2 report, which says USCIS has approved 252 initial applications from South Dakota.

    In other words, SDDP and I postdated OldSarg’s attack before he even made it.

  39. Darin Larson

    JLB, if the law mandates the expulsion from our country of 800,000 or more kids that have been in this country for at least 10 years through no fault of their own, then the law is an ass.

    It seems to me that DACA is little different than a deferred prosecution. Sometimes it doesn’t make any sense to prosecute an otherwise law abiding citizen for an isolated, minor incident that doesn’t harm anyone else. In the interests of justice, a prosecutor may agree to forgo prosecution if the defendant does not have any further violations of the law for a lengthy period of time. If the citizen has a high likelihood of not repeating the criminal violation, society is better off not spending money for prosecution and incarceration as well as not losing a productive citizen that contributes to our economy.

    In similar fashion, it does not make sense to kick 800,000+ productive kids out of our country for a violation of immigration law that they did not cause. It is cruel to the kids who only have known America as their home and it harms our country as well in terms of the economic and social loss of otherwise productive future citizens. Give these kids a path to citizenship and this country, as well as the kids, will be much better off for it.

  40. As I said in my first post, I think the executive can likely constitutionally choose not to deport. However, the DACA grants affirmative rights contrary to current law, most importantly work authorization. Those affirmative rights are not akin to deferred prosecution.

    The law may be an ass, but it is the law. We are supposed to live in a nation of laws.

  41. Eve Fisher

    Where were all the “we’re a nation of laws” guys back when the Bundy boys were holding an armed stand-off over federal land in Nevada? Or taking over the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in Oregon? Back then conservatives were almost 100% in favor of the Bundys calling out the militia to take over federal and public land, despite the fact that that’s against numerous laws. Seems to me “the law” is mighty elastic in conservative circles, depending on who’s in trouble.

  42. JLB is correct on this. President Obama exceeded his authority with DACA, and he himself even admitted it. Usually it is the GOP Party that argues that the ends justify the means, but that’s essentially President Obama’s argument on this issue. He filled the void left by the inaction of congress. Now President Trump is throwing it back to congress and telling them it’s their issue – which it is.

  43. Eve- Despite the fact that there are lots of problems with federal land management, I agree with you regarding the Bundy situation (and the like), and always have. Quite frankly, polling shows most Republicans do. However, I can’t speak for all Republicans/conservatives.

  44. happy camper

    You got me pegged wrong just yesterday I was telling somebody white people are lazy. I heard it come out of my mouth, I wish we could get rid of them and keep the dreamers, but not really cause we must be a nation of laws. Obama overstepped his bounds, it’s complicated because wealthy employers have been exploiting this cheaper labor, it’s wrong, but it’s wrong because our politicians allowed it, so we do have some obligations, but now we must get back to enforcing our immigration laws or they will just keep coming illegally.

    And for the record Obama ain’t as great as you think he is, he was in love with some other woman but dumped her for Michelle who he thought would be more help to his political career. There’s a huge new book out on him. Your Spock Man is just a calculating politiican there it is. Everyone is calculating that’s why we have lazy “white” people cause they can get away with it. Nothing inherent just the set of circumstances we find ourselves in. It’s time to end benefits!

  45. That Jeff Sessions is just a racist ol’ Southern bastard republican.
    What we Dems have been saying all along the – the Republican party is just mean and racist. They’re not really interested in children once they’re out of the womb. Don’t fall for they’re pro-life stance, people

  46. I knew the Catholic Church which has always staunchly supported immigration would be against Trump’s decision. Hear, hear, read all about it South Dakota Catholics.

    https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/09/05/catholic-church-leaders-condemn-trump-administrations-decision-end-daca

  47. This is just your typical mean spirited move by Trump. He has to appease his racist supporters, you know, if he has any chance of getting reelected.

  48. I noticed pro-DACA protesters were not “protected” by heavily armed radical militia domestic terrorists, in their freedom of speech.

  49. mike from iowa

    Sheriff R PIE HOLE violated federal laws constantly and ignored federal judges orders not to racially profile. Drumpf pardoned him for violating our laws. What does that say about Drumpf’s respect for law and order?

    Jeff Sessions perjured himself twice, at least, and was still confirmed as the liar in chief’s Grand Wizard AG.

    Wingnuts claiming to respect the constitution and the laws of the land are totally laughable.

  50. mike from iowa

    Old what’shizname doesn’t understand how the Sinate works. Dems had to have 60 votes for every piece of legislature just to get it to the floor for a vote. Wingnuts could and did block most everything Dems attempted by filibuster so there was none of this 51 vote BS for Obama and Dems to pass legislation.

    When wingnuts regained control they rely on archaic rules to allow them to pass laws with 51 votes and the don’t have to allow Dems a vote.

  51. Leslie, that’s b/c ammosexuals tend to lean to the right. They’re not going to be supporting a bunch of immigrant minorities, you know.

  52. mike from iowa

    Garrow is being sued because his new book weighs so much no one can lift it-especially lazy-ass wingnut whiteys who want to use it as a backstop for target practice.

    Many critics aren’t overly kind about it either. I guess for a black man having white girlfriends is a sin in wingnutdumb. That a black man could harbor a belief that a black woman could help advance his career is pure evil. Blah blah blah.

  53. bearcreekbat

    Perhaps this executive decision is simply a means to pave the way for the arrest and prosecution of every single sick child in the US that has treated his or her seizures and cancer problems with a federally illegal dose of CBD from cannabis.

    After all, the law must be respected and those “illegal” sick children must be arrested and incarcerated if we are to respect federal law, right? Oh, and don’t forget to arrest the doctors who prescribe this illegal substance to help sick kids, and the co-conspirators in the legislatures of the 29 states that have thumbed their noses at federal law by passing state laws that disrespect federal prohibitions. And recall all the people who signed their names on initiatives aimed at violating federal law – like DACA kids, we have all their names and addresses on the petitions on file in the various states.

    By the way, does this mean we should now consider punishing the children of all law breakers here in the US, including punishing Booker and his sisters for their mom’s lawless behavior?

    http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/116057-republican-candidate-cited-for-numerous-traffic-violations

    What do ya think, Ol Sarg?

  54. mike from iowa

    One last tidbit- the wingnut appointed chief Judge of iowa’s 4th judicial district has a habit of taking immigrants picked up in raids that she helps Immigration plan and sentences them to longer terms in private prisons her hubby owns stock in and he just bought more stock 5 days before the last immigration raid.

    For some reason no one can see any conflicts for this judge. Jailing dreamers out to be a lucrative side venture for this judge and hubby.

  55. mike from iowa

    http://tinyurl.com/ybd4krr9

    Majorities of everyone disagree with Drumpf on DACA decision.

  56. Curious: how does exercising executive refrain to refrain from strictly enforcing immigration law against DACA recipients differ from exercising executive discretion to refrain from enforcing immigration law during Hurricane Irma?