IMMIGRATON - The Debate on Implactions of Presidential Action

"Debating the implications if Obama acts on immigration" PBS NewsHour 11/19/2014

Excerpt

GWEN IFILL (NewsHour):  Hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants have been deported since President Obama took office, as efforts at comprehensive immigration reform have fallen by the wayside in Congress.  Today, the White House announced the president has come up with a work-around, an executive action that would alter immigration policy without congressional action.

For more on the reach of presidential power when it comes to immigration policy, we turn to Frank Sharry, founder of America’s Voice, an immigration reform group, and Josh Blackman, a constitutional law professor at South Texas School of Law.

Frank Sharry, Senator John McCain and others have said this is an unconstitutional move that the president is taking.  What’s your response to that?

FRANK SHARRY, America’s Voice:  Not at all.

It’s well-established through historical precedent, and Supreme Court case law, and legislation that, look, every law enforcement agency has the right to decide, how are they going to use limited resources?  Are they going to after everyone?  Well, they don’t have the resources, so they have to set priorities, target resources.

The discretion is absolute.  So it makes sense that President Obama’s contemplating saying, these people here are low priority, deep roots, been in the country, have citizen children.  Let’s protect them.  And then we will use the resources to go after the bad actors, the drug dealers, the national security threats, the serious criminals.

So, you know, look, and over the past 60 years, every president since Eisenhower, including Reagan and George W. Bush, has used executive action in the immigration arena.  George H.W. Bush took a step in 1990 to legalize roughly half the undocumented population with work permits.  There was no controversy about executive action then, and there shouldn’t be now.

GWEN IFILL:  Josh Blackman, what is the constitutional argument here?

JOSH BLACKMAN, South Texas College of Law:  So the president has a duty to take care of the law and to faithfully execute it.

So, while he does have discretion, I don’t agree that it’s absolute.  I think the important point to make is, this goes far beyond what has been done before.  It’s unprecedented.  Frank mentioned that George H.W. Bush granted deferrals for 1.5 million.  I think the key fact to remember is, these are people who are related to those being naturalized by the immigration laws.

So, it’s simply not the case.  Here, President Obama imposed DACA for the dreamers.  And now he’s going to add five million, six million more.  None of these people under statutory law have any pathway to citizenship.  This is really different than what was done before.