Latest Amnesty News | ӣ��Ƶ

Turkish grad student who co-authored anti-Israel op-ed at Tufts self-deports after legal battle with DHS

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 13:18:43 -0400

Rumeysa Ozturk, a Tufts University medical graduate student from Turkey whose charges were dropped after DHS detained her for allegedly "[engaging] in activities in support of Hamas," has self-deported to Turkey, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Ozturk self-deported from the U.S. late Thursday night on a flight to Istanbul, Turkey, according to sources familiar.

Ozturk was detained by ICE in Somerville, Massachusetts, in March 2025, sparking a battle between the Trump administration and a federal judge over her detainment.

The Tufts graduate student was living in the U.S. under an F-1 student visa, which the Trump administration revoked around March 21, 2025. At the time her visa was revoked, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Trump administration were cracking down on student visas for students who were involved in protests and demonstrations regarding Israel and Palestine.

JUDGE WHO BLASTED TRUMP AS 'AUTHORITARIAN' BLOCKS US FROM DEPORTING PRO-PALESTINIAN CAMPUS ACTIVISTS

"After 13 years of dedicated study, I am very proud to have completed my Ph.D. and to return home on my own timeline," Ozturk said in a statement. "The time stolen from me by the U.S. government belongs not just to me, but to the children and youth I have dedicated my life to advocating for. With them in mind, I am choosing to return home as planned to continue my career as a woman scholar without losing more time to the state-imposed violence and hostility I have experienced in the United States – all for nothing more than co-signing an op-ed advocating for Palestinian rights."

Ozturk co-authored an opinion piece on March 26, 2024, that was published in Tufts Daily, a student newspaper on campus.

"Credible accusations against Israel include accounts of deliberate starvation and indiscriminate slaughter of Palestinian civilians and plausible genocide," the op-ed read.

The authors, including Ozturk, were critical of the university’s response to anti-Israel protests, saying that the university should publicly acknowledge Palestinian suffering.

Rubio specifically referenced opinion pieces in a statement surrounding the revoking of student visas, notably after the arrest of Ozturk on March 25, 2025.

DHS SAYS COLUMBIA STUDENT TAKEN INTO CUSTODY IS ILLEGAL ALIEN WHOSE VISA WAS TERMINATED UNDER OBAMA ADMIN

"If you apply for a visa to enter the United States and be a student, and you tell us that the reason why you're coming to the United States is not just because you want to write op-eds, but because you want to participate in movements that are involved in doing things like vandalizing universities, harassing students, taking over buildings, creating a ruckus — we're not going to give you a visa," Rubio said.

Trump's Department of Justice also weighed in on Ozturk's self-deportation.

"Attending elite colleges and universities in the United States is a privilege afforded to foreign students who respect our values and follow our laws," a DOJ official told ӣ��Ƶ. "Rümeysa Öztürk chose not to abide by those simple conditions, and as a result left the United States - something the Administration sought to accomplish from the beginning. We will continue to seek the deportation of any foreign student who abuses their opportunity to study in America by engaging in vile antisemitism, harassment, or other illegal behavior."

Following Ozturk’s arrest, she was transferred to Methuen, Mass., then Lebanon, New Hampshire, and Vermont before she was sent to the South Louisiana ICE processing facility, according to reports.

Protests erupted at Tufts and across the country over her arrest, and two months later she was released on bail.

ANTI-ISRAEL AGITATOR MAHMOUD KHALIL ONE STEP CLOSER TO DEPORTATION WITH IMMIGRATION BOARD RULING

The legal battle continued between the Trump administration and Ozturk, who was legally represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), until Feb. 9 when Biden-appointed Boston immigration Judge Roopal Patel terminated deportation proceedings.

Patel ruled that the Department of Homeland Security lacked the legal grounds to deport her.

"I grieve for the many human beings who do not get to see the mistreatment they have faced brought into the light," Ozturk said in a statement released by her attorneys after the ruling. "When we openly talk about the many injustices around us, including the treatment of immigrants and others who have been targeted and thrown in for-profit ICE prisons, as well as what is happening in Gaza, true justice will prevail."

THE US GOVERNMENT TARGETED ME FOR MY POLITICAL SPEECH. IT COULD HAPPEN TO YOU, TOO

The Trump Department of Justice fired Patel, among other immigration judges, last week.

Since Patel ruled as an immigration judge and not a federal Article III judge, the Trump administration and the executive branch has authority over her tenure.

The White House issued a press release on April 9, titled: "Era of Amnesty Is Over: President Trump Restores Rule of Law to Immigration Courts," in which the administration touted "the most aggressive and successful immigration enforcement overhaul in modern history."

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

"President Trump promised to end the open borders nightmare — and he is delivering on that promise with unrelenting force. The era of catch-and-release, mass releases, and activist judicial amnesty is over," the White House statement reads.

WILL CHAMBERLAIN: 'Maryland Dad' is perfect example of why Rep Salazar's amnesty scam must fail

Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:18:34 -0400

Rep. Maria Salazar keeps insisting her DIGNIDAD Act isn’t amnesty; that it merely grants "dignity" to long-term illegal immigrants who play by the new rules she wrote. Mierda. Her bill is a backdoor path to citizenship for millions of people who broke our laws to get here. Congress should kill it outright, and every Republican co-sponsor should pull their name off it and apologize to their constituents.

To demonstrate how ridiculous her bill is, let’s apply it to the "Maryland Father," Kilmar Abrego Garcia. He’s the illegal alien from El Salvador who came here in 2011 when he was 16. Law enforcement has tied him to MS-13. His wife accused him of beating her. He was caught on a police bodycam ferrying other illegals up from Texas to Maryland. Yet under Salazar’s bill, he checks every box for the "Dreamer" track that leads straight to a green card and then citizenship. A future Democrat administration could just process the paperwork.

The bill treats him as eligible for citizenship because he entered as a minor 15 years ago. Never mind that he left and was removed — he gets an exception to the continuous-presence requirement. You would think that his ties to MS-13 would exclude him, and the bill does say that gang members are barred if they "voluntarily participated in offenses committed by a criminal street gang." But turn the page and Salazar’s bill quietly guts the rule: federal authorities would be explicitly forbidden from using state or federal gang databases to prove anyone is a gang member. Not allegations from the FBI’s gang files. Not state gang task force records. Nothing. They apparently would need a full criminal conviction for gang activity — which would already make the person inadmissible on ordinary felony grounds. It’s the kind of provision that makes you wonder if Maria Salazar thinks we’re all stupid.

Domestic violence? The bill doesn’t count mere allegations or even police reports. It requires a conviction, which in Abrego Garcia’s case doesn’t exist. And even then, Abrego Garcia could argue he was himself a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or trafficking and get a waiver. Human smuggling? The Secretary of Homeland Security could choose to waive that disqualification for "humanitarian purposes, family unity, or because the waiver is otherwise in the public interest." That’s a loophole the size of the van that Abrego Garcia used to traffic migrants.

DEM SENATORS DODGE CRUCIAL QUESTION ON ILLEGAL ALIEN ACCUSED OF KILLING CHICAGO COLLEGE STUDENT

All he would have to do on top of that is enroll in some "education program" that helps him get a GED or a technical credential. After meeting a work or education requirement for a few years, he would qualify for lawful permanent residence. From there, it’s smooth sailing to citizenship. Tell me again how this isn’t amnesty.

And Abrego Garcia’s case is just one example of how terrible the act would be; it’s even worse when you consider the scale. Salazar’s DIGNITY Program would give deferred action and work permits to millions more who’ve been here since late 2020, complete with a path to renewable "Dignity Status."

This is exactly the opposite of what voters demanded in 2024. Americans elected a Republican Congress and a president who promised mass deportations. Instead, some Republicans are inexplicably lining up behind a Florida congresswoman’s bill that would let wife-beating MS-13 associates stay and eventually vote. The co-sponsors, especially the ones in safe red districts who should know better, need to own this. Withdraw your support. Kill the bill. Do not let it come to the floor.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The rule of law isn’t optional. We already have a legal immigration system. People wait years, pay thousands, and follow the rules. Handing the same benefits to people who jumped the line, joined gangs, beat their spouses, or trafficked others is a middle finger to every American who obeys the law and every legal immigrant who did it the right way.

There is no fixing this bill. It needs to die. Every Republican co-sponsor should publicly withdraw support today. If they won’t, primary voters should vote them out in 2026. The American people did not send them to Washington to vote for amnesty. They should remember that.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM WILL CHAMBERLAIN

GOP Rep Randy Fine declares that deporting all illegal immigrants is the top way to make the US affordable

Wed, 08 Apr 2026 12:51:31 -0400

Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., asserted in a post on X that deporting all illegal immigrants would be the best way to make the U.S. affordable.

"The number one thing we can do to make America affordable is to deport EVERY illegal immigrant," he wrote in the Wednesday post on X

He specifically suggested that ousting illegal immigrants helps decrease costs for housing, healthcare, education and vehicle insurance.

LAWMAKER SAYS IRAN TARGETED HIM IN PHISHING ATTACK DISGUISED AS TV INTERVIEW

"Deportations lower housing and rent prices because there are millions fewer who need them. Health care costs fall because uninsured illegals aren’t filling emergency rooms. Education costs fall because uninsured minors aren’t costing $10k-$20k per year. Car insurance costs fall because uninsured illegals aren’t driving up 'uninsured and underinsured' insurance," Fine asserted.

Fine also expressed staunch opposition to the prospect of amnesty.

ICE ARRESTS ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ACCUSED OF KIDNAPPING 4-YEAR-OLD GIRL FROM LAUNDROMAT

"DEPORTATIONS = AFFORDABILITY," he said. "No amnesty. For anyone. Ever. GO HOME."

In a Tuesday post on X, he wrote: "I’m not a no on amnesty. I’m a hell no. Deport them ALL."

DAYLIGHT HAMMER ATTACK SUSPECT IS ILLEGAL ALIEN RELEASED UNDER BIDEN POLICIES: DHS

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

"Let me be clear. I will never, ever, ever, ever vote for amnesty. For anyone. Ever," he declared in another post on Tuesday.

Their plan was a flood of illegal immigration. Our answer is an immigration moratorium

Mon, 03 Nov 2025 05:00:08 -0500

President Joe Biden's decision to allow the free flow of illegal immigration into our country has resulted in 20 million illegal immigrants living in the United States. We knew nothing about these people. We didn’t know where they came from or why they were here.

Now Americans are forced to compete even more with illegal immigrants for jobs and housing, to have their children share our classrooms, to wait longer at the hospital, and to even have their lawfully earned, government-funded benefits depleted because of them.

Why? All because career politicians either turned a blind eye to it, or, as I suspect, more insidiously cheered it on.

But illegal immigration is frankly a symptom of the broader disease that, if we choose to ignore, will cost us our country.

BROADCAST BIAS: ON UPSIDE-DOWN TV NETWORKS, ICE AND THE NATIONAL GUARD ARE THE DANGEROUS LAW-BREAKERS

This very minute, New York City is on the precipice of electing a Ugandan immigrant who is hell-bent on the destruction of a once great city. There's a member of Congress from Mogadishu whose entire existence is predicated on turning America into Somalia.

These are not isolated incidents, either — they're a sign of things to come. This is what happens when career politicians have contempt for a secure border.

From former President George W. Bush to former President Barack Obama, from former President Joe Biden to Kentucky Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, the permanent political class has been working for more than two decades to pass mass amnesty regardless of the consequence. They have made it clear they do not care about an American identity, they do not care about a secure border, they only care about ingesting as many third-world migrants as is humanly possible.

President Donald Trump has been better than we ever could have hoped on the issue. Illegal border crossings have slowed to a halt, and we have actually invested in making sure our border remains secure.

TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION RESET IS LIFTING WAGES AND FORCING REAL ECONOMIC REFORM

Unfortunately, the D.C. swamp is working overtime to undermine his agenda. Even now, RINOs and Democrats are continuing to fight Trump in an effort to pass amnesty for the tens of millions of illegals still living in our country.

That's why I have called for the implementation of an immigration moratorium, which would remain in effect until we deport every single illegal immigrant from this country.

When I first called for this moratorium, the corporatists squealed. The same corporatists who cheer on trade deals that ship jobs overseas and decimate places like Kentucky in the name of increasing shareholder value.

My message to them is simple: I care a lot more about American workers and their well-being than I do about big corporate interests.

UNAUTHORIZED IMMIGRANT POPULATION SOARED TO AN ALL-TIME HIGH UNDER BIDEN, NEW REPORT SHOWS

But their argument is flawed to begin with: If companies are forced to confront the fact that we are not going to let them ignore our immigration laws to import cheap labor or abuse our visa system, then they will have exactly two options:

First, they could simply raise wages, which would not only make these jobs more viable for Americans but also make them more culturally acceptable.

Or else they could invest in technology and innovation, which will turn low-wage, low-skilled positions into machine-operating positions, which will align with our native workforce.

It's always funny to me that the standard retort to my saying Americans will do these jobs if we pay more is, "Americans don't want to pick strawberries!"

TOM HOMAN PUTS SANCTUARY CITIES 'ON NOTICE' AS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CRACKS DOWN ON IMMIGRATION

Well, guess what, folks, Americans don't want to pick up trash either. But if you pay them enough and stop pretending like any job that puts food on the table is beneath Americans, they'll do just fine.

But the existential immediacy around immigration is not an economic argument at all. It's a cultural one.

We have been invaded — that is a fact. The current state of our country is as if we imported a state the size of New York or Texas, and every one of those people refuses to assimilate.

They refuse to speak our language, participate in our communities or live our culture or our values.

TRUMP IS TARGETING NONVIOLENT AND LEGAL IMMIGRANTS. AMERICANS ARE STARTING TO NOTICE

Right here in Kentucky, we have county clerks who are told they have to process applications in any one of 120 different languages. That's not just monumentally stupid, it's a sign that we're letting foreign citizens dictate the terms of their participation in our communities.

These people don't care what it means to be American, and we ignore their outward hostility towards us at our own peril. It's not hyperbole to say that Western civilization is on the line. Look no further than other developed nations that chose to ignore the warning signs.

The United Kingdom might as well be a Middle Eastern country. Shocking migrant crimes happen, what feels like daily, in France and Sweden — countries that are now practically war zones.

And the sad part is Democrats look at all of that and say, "let's bring that to America." And RINOs look at that and say, "Oh well, that's the cost of cheap labor."

Both of those sentiments are equally disgusting and must be soundly rejected.

Had this moratorium been put in place 20 years ago, think about how different our country would be.

Think about how many young people would be in a house and starting a family because prices weren't driven up by people who cram four families into a single-family house.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Think about a healthcare system and social safety net programs that didn't get decimated because they were taxed by tens of millions of people it never accounted for.

Think about how much safer our law enforcement officers would have been if they hadn't been attacked for trying to enforce our immigration laws.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

That fantasy world is what America is supposed to be. We're not supposed to be out of work, poorer, less safe, and less secure just because it benefits globalists and corporatists.

America has paid the price for the insidious actions of career politicians. And frankly, we may not be able to get the genie back in the bottle. But if we are going to give our country and Western civilization a chance to survive, it starts with an immigration moratorium right now.

House Dems propose bill to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants

Sat, 11 Mar 2023 12:41:23 -0500

A group of House Democrats is reviving an effort to give a pathway to citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants who are already in the U.S. by updating a nearly century-old registry to allow for their statuses to be adjusted.

Six Democrats this week reintroduced the Renewing Immigration Provisions of the Immigration Act of 1929. The bill would update a status adjustment process — commonly known as the registry — that allows for those in the country illegally before a certain date to have their status regularized.

The registry was last updated in 1986 and at that time allowed for illegal immigrants who had been in the country continuously since 1972 to have their status adjusted and obtain a green card, which in turn would allow them to apply for U.S. citizenship.

The Democrats introducing the bill — Reps. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., Norma Torres, D-Calif., Lou Correa, D-Calif., Grace Meng, D-NY, Adriano Espaillat, D-NY, and Jesús "Chuy" García, D-Ill. — said it would affect approximately eight million immigrants, a population greater than the state of Arizona. In a press release, the Democrats said that 148 local, regional and national organizations supported the measure.

MEXICAN PRESIDENT THREATENS TO MEDDLE IN US ELECTIONS WITH ‘INFORMATION CAMPAIGN’ AGAINST REPUBLICANS

Lofgren, the lead sponsor on the bill, took a shot at Republicans for "political stunts" on immigration and the border.

"While the extreme MAGA Republicans make dozens of trips to the border and perform other political stunts, my colleagues and I are once again focusing on immigration action by reintroducing this commonsense registry legislation that is simply an update of the law that was first put in place in 1929," she said.

"As our predecessors in the 70th Congress understood, providing stability to those who are of good character and who have resided here for a significant period of time is good for America. Updating this historically bipartisan provision to provide lawful permanent resident status to vetted immigrants who have been a part of our communities for years will make our country stronger," she said. "Updating this historically bipartisan provision to provide lawful permanent resident status to vetted immigrants who have been a part of our communities for years will make our country stronger."

"It’s no secret immigrants built our nation – and those who came to the United States years ago in search of a better life and have set down roots here deserve a chance at permanent residence," Rep. Espaillat said. "There are currently millions of immigrants living in legal limbo who face an uncertain future regarding their residency status. Our bill will provide them with a pathway toward citizenship allowing roughly eight million immigrants who have been residing in the U.S. for at least seven years, a chance to obtain their green cards through registry."

Democrats have previously made a number of attempts to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, including a registry update attempt, but so far they have been thwarted.

The Biden administration and congressional Democrats introduced a sweeping immigration bill in early 2021, which included a pathway to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants already in the country.

BORDER PATROL CHIEF ORTIZ TO TESTIFY AT HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE HEARING IN MCALLEN, TEXAS

When that bill failed to pick up any Republican support, Democrats attempted to get a number of forms of amnesty through via the budget reconciliation process later in the year. One of those attempts included an update to the registry. All the options were rejected by the Senate parliamentarian as inappropriate for a budget bill. The effort eventually fell apart after Sen. Joe Manchin, D-Va., withdrew his support.

But the push for legalization for illegal immigrants has continued, including with calls from Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Vice President Kamala Harris and President Biden — who made an appeal at the State of the Union address last month.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"America’s border problems won’t be fixed until Congress acts. If we won’t pass my comprehensive immigration reform, at least pass my plan to provide the equipment and officers to secure the border. And a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, those on temporary status, farmworkers, and essential workers," Biden said.

Biden's border crisis: What's the president's real plan and his ultimate endgame?

Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:00:04 -0400

What is the Biden administration’s official policy and endgame on the border and immigration? Simply put: overwhelm America with millions of illegal immigrants and force Republicans to the table to agree to grant citizenship to millions of people here illegally while promising to secure the border.

Of course, Biden won’t admit that. Instead, we’re left to figure out his policy objectives on our own.

Other than repeating the risible lie that "the border is secure" the Biden White House has articulated no coherent immigration or border security policy. As a result, we can only judge the administration by its words and deeds.

In contrast, like it or not, we knew what former President Donald Trump’s border policy was: secure the border and limit entry into the U.S. to those with legitimate claims under our laws. As a result, the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. declined from about 11.5 million in January 2019 to 10.2 million when Biden took office in January 2021. We also know the effect of Trump’s policies: record low unemployment for minorities and women and strong growth in real wages – until COVID-19 hit.

BIDEN'S BORDER CRISIS IS OUT OF CONTROL. HERE'S HOW LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN FIGHT BACK

We know that illegal immigration surged the moment Biden became president. And this while nothing changed in the way of federal personnel enforcing immigration law, technology at the border, or the border wall on which construction was immediately halted.

So, it was policy and perception that changed, not America’s ability to enforce its laws.

First, the deeds. Because of Biden’s weak approach to the border, more than 3 million illegal immigrants have crossed into the U.S. with as many as 5 million to 7 million expected by the end of Biden’s first term in office. Further, the pace of illegal immigrants is accelerating as word gets out that America’s borders are open. The number of illegal immigrants in America may balloon as much as a stunning 70% in only four years.

Now, the words. President Joe Biden famously said during a Democratic presidential debate that migrants should "…surge to the border, all those people who are seeking asylum, they deserve to be heard." They have. Biden said, "surge" and illegal immigrants heeded his call.

In the final presidential debate with President Donald Trump, Biden said that former President Barack Obama erred in deporting more than 3 million illegal immigrants. Further, he would not only undo all Trump administration immigration policies, but he would also direct Congress to pass a legislative pathway to citizenship for the more than 11 million undocumented people living in the U.S. in the first 100 days.

MEDIA, DEMS POINT FINGERS AT REPUBLICANS FOR BORDER CRISIS, SKIRT AROUND PLACING BLAME ON BIDEN

But, with Congress narrowly divided, a legislative pathway to citizenship is nearly impossible. As a result, the Biden administration is making up law as it goes, with Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas telling ӣ��Ƶ anchor Bret Baier on the May 1 edition of "ӣ��Ƶ Sunday" that deterring illegal immigrants is no longer the administration’s border policy.

Instead, Mayorkas admitted, "It is the objective of the Biden administration to make sure that we have safe, orderly and legal pathways for individuals to be able to access our legal system."

This message has been heard loud and clear, as each month brings a new record for apprehensions at the southern border – and subsequent releases into the interior.

Of course, the Biden process is neither safe nor orderly nor legal.

Up to half of all women and girls seeking to come north are sexually assaulted.

Migrant deaths on the border routinely hit new grisly highs – and are seriously undercounted.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE OPINION NEWSLETTER

Mexican criminal drug and human trafficking cartels charge up to $8,000 per person granted entry into the U.S. For those who can’t pay it all up front, the cartels have created a horrific new system of slavery, extracting tribute from illegal immigrants and their families on pain of torture, kidnapping or death for noncompliance.

The cartels have operational control of the Mexican border – and largely control the Mexican government, which has descended into a hopelessly corrupt and lawless narco state where officials who dare to enforce the law end up assassinated, often in publicly gruesome ways.

With the would-be immigrants pouring across the border come rivers of deadly drugs as border agents are diverted to processing people who claim asylum rather than intercepting drugs.

Last year, drug overdoses killed 107,000 Americans, 20,000 more than were killed in every U.S. military intervention since World War II. Most of the drugs and chemical precursors that kill Americans originate in China, where Communist Party officials profit off American suffering.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Should Republicans regain control of Congress in the November elections, they can try to force Biden’s hand on illegal immigration. They can even impeach administration officials for not enforcing the law – though conviction in the Senate would likely be out of reach.

But Biden may see an advantage in doing nothing to secure the border as he seeks to pressure Republicans into agreeing to a massive amnesty and citizenship for up to 18 million illegal immigrants in exchange for an empty promise to secure our border.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM CHUCK DeVORE

Sen. Tom Cotton: Dems' 'DACA-For-All' amnesty plan must be stopped

Mon, 01 Nov 2021 08:00:30 -0400

Only 42% of Americans approve of Joe Biden’s presidency and as few as 15% approve of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi’s Congress. The reason for this abysmal approval rating is simple; Democrats in Washington do not represent the interests of the American people. Instead, they appear hellbent on bankrupting our government, derailing our economy, and dissolving our border. Their multitrillion-dollar spending bill would do all three.

No provision is more pernicious than the immigration proposal pushed by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who has tried to force amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants into this bill not once, not twice, but three times. The Senate parliamentarian has ruled two of his proposals out of order, and we are awaiting her ruling on Sen. Durbin’s third attempt to bypass the Senate filibuster.

His most recent proposal would amount to nothing less than DACA-For-All. It would grant full public benefits to millions of illegal aliens and grant five-year "amnesty passes" for illegal border crossers. These amnesty passes could be renewed in perpetuity, until Congress is forced to make this amnesty plan permanent. This proposal would cost the American people unknown billions of dollars and would add to our nearly $30 trillion national debt.

SEN. JOHN BARRASSO: BIDEN'S ‘CIVILIAN CLIMATE CORPS’ WITH HEFTY PRICE TAG STILL PRIORITY IN SPENDING SPREE

It would cost money we don’t have and take away jobs that we cannot afford to lose. Once legalized, these millions of illegal aliens will naturally seek legitimate employment and take positions that would otherwise be filled by American citizens and lawful immigrants. Working-class Americans would disproportionately suffer as a result of this policy.

The current draft of the Democrat’s bill also includes a nearly unprecedented assault on the livelihoods of American tech workers. In service of their big money donors, Democrats intend to authorize green cards for hundreds of thousands of foreign tech workers. On day one, Democrats want to open the floodgates to 200,000 such workers.

The tech industry has been subsidized with cheap foreign labor for long enough. Silicon Valley should invest in upskilling the American workforce instead of using their money to lobby Congress for a new giveaway.

In a nod to their extreme base, the Democrats' bill would additionally give at least a billion dollars in "trauma" compensation to illegal aliens removed under the Trump administration. This is analogous to paying a burglar who broke into your home for the "psychological trauma" they endured during the crime. Reparations for illegal aliens is absolute insanity and will only encourage more lawbreaking.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE OPINION NEWSLETTER

These proposals, irresponsible in normal times, are insane under current circumstances. In a painfully sluggish economy wracked by inflation, supply chain shortages and rising energy prices, the last thing Americans need is a massive influx of foreign workers taking jobs and opportunities.

The Democrats' DACA-For-All and reparation proposals would exacerbate the worst border crisis in American history. Last year, a record 1.7 million illegal aliens were encountered at the border and hundreds of thousands of additional illegal immigrants escaped into the interior of our country. These amnesty and reparation proposals would cause a further meltdown at the border by sending the unmistakable message that crime pays.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Amnesty would also worsen our nation’s spiraling drug crisis, which starts at the Rio Grande and flows into every city, town and community in our country. The majority of deadly narcotics sold on street corners in the United States are smuggled across the southern border. Last year alone, the Border Patrol seized nearly three tons of meth and enough fentanyl to kill over 100 million people.

The Democrats' radical spending bill threatens American prosperity. If passed, it will result in open borders and closed businesses, rising taxes and falling wages, growing debt and shrinking opportunities. It will put left-wing extremists and special interests first and put American workers, families and citizens last. I am urging my colleagues to join with me and kill this bill.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM SEN. TOM COTTON

Republicans torch Biden over report that migrants released without court dates are disappearing into the US

Tue, 27 Jul 2021 18:47:39 -0400

Republicans torched President Biden over a recent report that tens of thousands of migrants caught illegally crossing the border were released without court dates, the vast majority of whom haven't appeared at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) offices as directed.

Axios reported on Tuesday that the Biden administration released 50,000 undocumented migrants into the U.S. since March, with only 13% of them appearing to the ICE officials they’re supposed to meet.

AMERICA FIRST LEGAL DEMANDS INFO ON BIDEN’S ‘EXTREME’ OPEN BORDER POLICIES: ‘THE RAILS HAVE BEEN RIPPED OFF’

The Biden administration’s decision to release illegal migrants into the U.S. without a notice to appear in court is an unprecedented move, Axios noted. Migrants are instead given a list of ICE office addresses and contacts, being told to go to one of them.

Stephen Miller, a former adviser to former President Trump, told ӣ��Ƶ in an exclusive Tuesday statement that the report "is just the tip of the iceberg from the data that we need."

"But again, that's all it is, a snapshot. We need all of the data pertaining to this administration's catch and release policy," Miller continued. "Every piece of it, so that we can have total accountability and we can have a complete public awareness."

Miller said that we "shouldn’t have to scrap and claw in order to get these little snippets leaking out in stories" and quipped it was if as "though it was beneath the dignity of the Biden administration to provide this information to the public."

"They have an affirmative obligation and duty to inform and advise the American public what they are doing in the public's name and with public taxpayer dollars and with public resources," Miller continued. "We all welcome every time there is a leak that can begin to shed some additional light on this open borders scheme."

"The government itself needs to release official data pertaining to the extent, the scope, and the pervasiveness of catch and release across the entire southwestern border of the United States," he added.

A plethora of Republicans shared similar sentiments, with Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, calling the border crisis a "complete disaster" and calling on the president and Vice President Harris to secure the border.

Senator Tom Cotton, R-Ark., also weighed in on Twitter, writing that "[c]atch and release is Biden’s official policy" and accused the administration of "trying to sneak through massive amnesty."

"The #BidenBorderCrisis is no longer a border state problem," Rep. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., tweeted. "Illegal aliens flooding our border are coming to a town near you."

Other Republicans tore into the president, as well.

The crisis at the southern border continues to grow more intense as critics grow louder in regards to the Biden administration's handling of the issue.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The White House did not respond to ӣ��Ƶ’ request for comment.

Jim Jordan: 'Do you have free speech when only the left can define what can be said?'

Thu, 18 Mar 2021 20:16:21 -0400

Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan joined Maria Bartiromo on "ӣ��Ƶ Primetime" and slammed the Democrats for not holding a hearing on the border crisis, while passing a bill that created a pathway for millions of illegal immigrants.

We’ve said why not have this a hearing about this crisis on the border. Instead they go around the committee and pass just 40 minutes ago, Maria, they pass a bill that gives amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants. So amnesty while there is this chaos on the border, I mean, this is so out-of-touch with where the American people are. But this is how radical left, the Democrats are. And then, of course, the cancel culture issue this idea that—I always ask it this way, do you have a functioning First Amendment when only one side is allowed to talk? Do you have free speech when only the left can define what can be said? So that's the situation we are in.

The Judiciary Committee should be focused on those two issues. Instead they pass radical things like defund the police, federal control of the elections and now an amnesty bill without having the kind of hearings you are supposed to have on Capitol Hill in the United States Congress.

The House Judiciary member also targeted Big Tech for their efforts in suppressing major stories, such as Hunter Biden’s emails, in the lead-up to the November general election.

We had two amazing witnesses last week in the hearing in one of the subcommittees of the Judiciary and they talked about the collusion between Big Tech and certain players in big media where they kept the Hunter Biden story from we, the people. And everyone knew that. The press knew about this, Big Tech knew about this, but they kept it from the American people as we are getting ready for the biggest election that we have, the presidential election.

So, what they are doing, not only via cancel culture but what they did in the election, to make sure Americans didn't get important information, I think is so troublesome. So we're trying to figure out the best way to deal with this. We think section 230 has to be repealed and reformed. We also think you have to look at the antitrust law and the size of some of these big tech companies as we move forward.

CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE FULL INTERVIEW

What is DACA and what does the Trump administration want to do with it?

Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:30:00 -0400

The Trump administration announced last year its plan to phase out the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA) – which provides a level of amnesty to certain undocumented immigrants, many of whom came to the U.S. as children – with a six-month delay for recipients. But a federal appeals court ruled against the proposal in early November, declaring the government couldn't immediately end the program.

“The Executive wields awesome power in the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws,” the ruling said. “Our decision today does not curb that power, but rather enables its exercise in a manner that is free from legal misconceptions and is democratically accountable to the public.”

Trump had initially set a March 5 deadline for the program and called on Congress to pass legislation pertaining to the young immigrants. But the deadline came and went, with no congressional action but several lawsuits challenging the administration's decision to end the program.

FEDERAL APPEALS COURT RULES AGAINST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ON DACA

Federal judges in New York and Washington also have ruled against President Trump on DACA.

President Trump has repeatedly blamed Democrats for inaction.

Here’s a look at the DACA program and why the Trump administration wants to dismantle it.

What is the DACA program?

The DACA program was formed through executive action by former President Barack Obama in 2012 and allowed certain people who came to the U.S. illegally as minors to be protected from immediate deportation. Recipients, called Dreamers, were able to request “consideration of deferred action” for a period of two years, which was subject to renewal.

“Deferred action is a use of prosecutorial discretion to defer removal action against an individual for a certain period of time,” U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services stated. “Deferred action does not provide lawful status.”

Individuals were able to request DACA status if they were under the age of 31 on June 15, 2012, came to the U.S. before turning 16 and continuously lived in the country since June 15, 2007.

Individuals also had to have a high school diploma, GED certification, been honorably discharged from the military or still be in school. Recipients could not have a criminal record.

It did not provide “legal status.”

How many people are affected by DACA?

Nearly 800,000 youth, called Dreamers, are under the program's umbrella.

Daniel Garza, president of the conservative immigration nonprofit Libre Initiative, told ӣ��Ƶ that DACA offers a “reprieve from a life of uncertainty for innocent kids who didn’t break the law.”

“It’s rather disappointing to think they could return to a state of anxiety and fear,” he said.

What did the Trump administration do?

The Trump administration announced in September 2017 that it planned to phase out DACA for current recipients, and no new requests would be granted. But a lower court order required the administration to continue accepting renewal applications for those under the DACA program, and the Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration's request to intervene.

Since the announcement, Trump had offered to work with lawmakers on a solution for the hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. who fell under DACA’s umbrella of protections. But at the same time, he has repeatedly blamed Democrats on social media for lack of a solution.

Earlier this year, Trump released his “four pillars” of immigration reform, which included a provision for legal status for DACA recipients and others who would be eligible for DACA status. The White House estimated that total to be 1.8 million people. The Senate rejected the plan.

Republicans – and some Democrats – opposed Obama’s directive establishing DACA from the start as a perceived overreach of executive power.

Obama spoke out on social media after the Trump administration announced a plan to dismantle the program, stating that it's "self-defeating ... and it is cruel" to end DACA and questioned the motive behind the decision.

Do any DACA recipients serve in the military?

Despite some rumors circulating online to the contrary, Dreamers were eligible to serve in the U.S. military since 2014 when the Pentagon adopted a policy to allow a certain amount of illegal immigrants to join.

In fiscal year 2016, 359 DACA recipients had enlisted in the Army – which is the only branch to accept immigrants of this category.

ӣ��Ƶ' John Roberts and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

US needs immigration reform but Obama's plan undemocratic, unconstitutional

Thu, 20 Nov 2014 21:49:56 -0500

President Obama’s speech Thursday night was about immigration reform in content, but his proposals will be overshadowed by the debate over the constitutionality of his actions and how the Republicans will respond.

I am personally a huge supporter of immigration reform and felt that the bipartisan Senate bill was too draconian. It would take too long to get citizenship for illegal immigrants already living in the country. And it required them to jump through too many hoops, which would, as Illinois Representative Luis Gutierrez argued, mean that we would continue to deport over a thousand immigrants every day.

There is a way to create two plans, with one that focuses on securing the border and the other on a pathway to citizenship. By disentangling these two issues, Congress may be able to make progress and we can avoid more executive orders and gridlock.

[pullquote]

The president reiterated his desire for Congress to send him an immigration bill that he can sign, which simply hasn’t happened. But moving ahead with piecemeal bills passed by executive order is fundamentally anti-democratic and it is unconstitutional.

As for the content of the president’s order, it will help a projected five million illegal immigrants to live without fear of deportation. Those who will be eligible to stay here must have been here for five years or more, have children who are American citizens, pass a criminal background check and pay taxes. Only those that meet this criteria will be allowed to stay and the president was clear that this wasn’t granting amnesty to illegal immigrants – it isn’t a “free pass,” as he put it.

Obama described his approach as “commonsense” and “middle ground” and was, unsurprisingly, very defensive of his actions. Keeping families together and not allowing new illegal immigrants into the country were the themes throughout his speech.

He said, "The real amnesty [is] leaving this broken system the way it is. Mass amnesty would be unfair. Mass deportation would be both impossible and contrary to our character. What I’m describing is accountability – a commonsense, middle ground approach: If you meet the criteria, you can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. If you’re a criminal, you’ll be deported. If you plan to enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up."

The president reminded Americans that what makes us an exceptional country is that all of us, at one point, came to American in search of a better life. And these five million people are no different.

Nevertheless, Americans want to see the border secured before we do any other immigration reform. And the president’s speech contained no promise – or order – to do that. It follows that it’s unlikely that anyone will be able to focus on anything besides the fact that President Obama used executive action and that the border won’t be secured.

Anxiety will continue to grow that more illegal immigrants will stream into America, especially since many will interpret Obama’s amnesty for millions of illegals as an invitation for more to come.

Time is running out for Congress to come together and pass comprehensive immigration reform that accomplishes what the American people want: secure borders and a pathway to citizenship.

The president’s speech Thursday night showed very little progress towards that goal.

Is DACA deal headed for disaster?

Tue, 16 Jan 2018 04:00:00 -0500

Will there be a DACA deal?

My sense is that both sides want one—but the chances are increasingly slim.

The Democrats may be less inclined to cooperate now that President Trump is on the defensive after global media criticism that he assailed "s---hole countries"—although the Washington Post, National Review’s Rich Lowry and others say aides are now insisting that the president said "s---house countries." Hole or house is a distinction without a difference, in my view.

The uproar prompted the president to tell reporters Sunday that "nah, I'm not a racist. I'm the least racist person you have ever interviewed, that I can tell you."

Trump also played down the notion of a DACA compromise, saying, "Honestly, I don't think the Democrats want to make a deal."

Democratic lawmakers want to save nearly 800,000 dreamers from deportation, but they’re not wild about pouring billions into Trump's border wall and taking other steps he's demanding on immigration.

Given the rhetoric from Dick Durbin and others that Trump was espousing racist views when he said he didn't want more immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and Africa as opposed to Norway, the Democrats are less inclined to give ground. (Yes, this has gotten tied up with Friday’s government-shutdown deadline, but nobody thinks that will actually happen.)

And Trump got strong blowback from his base, before the "s" hit the fan, for his willingness to cut a deal on the dreamers. Conservative commentators, led by Ann Coulter, called his stance a betrayal and complained about "amnesty."

The White House initially chose not to deny the Washington Post report that Trump had said "s---hole." The president later said he had used "tough" language but not that exact word, and now the administration has moved to a more forceful denial. Durbin says Trump used the word several times, Republican lawmakers either dispute it or say they didn't hear it, but Lindsey Graham did admonish the president for his wording during the White House meeting.

Trump yesterday tweeted a whack at the Senate Democratic whip, who earned a dimunitive nickname:

"Senator Dicky Durbin totally misrepresented what was said at the DACA meeting. Deals can't get made when there is no trust! Durbin blew DACA and is hurting our Military."

Any immigration compromise was always going to be tough, given the raw emotions surrounding the issue. That's why both George W. Bush and Barack Obama failed to pass immigration reform, leading to Obama's executive order shielding the dreamers.

As Rand Paul said on "Meet the Press": "Both sides now are destroying the setting in which anything meaningful can happen."

We seem to be back at Washington's default setting, where gridlock rules and compromise is eternally elusive. The essence of a political deal is that each side accepts something it doesn't want—tougher border security and immigration limits versus leniency for those brought here illegally as kids—to obtain important benefits.

But emotions are running so high—against Trump, against Democratic leaders, about immigration itself—that the good will needed to do such deals seems to be evaporating.

Trump ends temporary immigration permits to Nicaraguans

Tue, 07 Nov 2017 06:16:00 -0500

The Trump administration is expected to end in January 2019 a special immigration status given to over 5,000 Nicaraguans that protects them from deportations.

Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke said Monday that the Temporary Protected Status has run its course and is no longer necessary for Nicaraguan immigrants living in the U.S.

Immigrants living under such permit will be given 12 months' notice in order to ensure a smooth return to their country and for the Nicaraguan government to prepare for the influx of the returning citizens.

“This will provide time for individuals with TPS to seek an alternative lawful immigration status in the United States, if eligible, or, if necessary, arrange for their departure,” the DHS statement read.

The program’s critics say the scheme allowed participants to continue extending their stays, effectively giving amnesty to those who immigrated illegally, despite no war or natural disasters in their country, according to Reuters.

Nicaraguans and Hondurans have been able to gain the permit since 1999 after the Clinton administration gave the status following Hurricane Mitch that wrecked the countries.

Duke said in the statement that the conditions caused by the hurricane “no longer exist, and thus, under the applicable statute, the current TPS designation must be terminated.”

The White House will also deliberate next year whether a similar program for more than 85,000 immigrants from Honduras should end as well. Duke delayed the final decision to learn more about the situation, but extended the status for six months – up until July 2018.

Both programs were set to expire in next year in January.

The TPS program covers more than 400,000 people from 9 countries that were subject to war or natural disasters and whose citizens came to the U.S – either legally or illegally – and prevents any deportations.

The scheme, initially enacted by a presidential decree back in 1990, was meant to be temporary, but both the Bush and Obama administrations extended the program, fearing the countries could not cope if the residents returned to their homelands.

Trump ended the permits for Sudan in September and issued a shorter program renewal for almost 60,000 immigrants from Haiti who were allowed to gain the permit following the 2010 earthquake.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Sens. Graham, Durbin introduce bipartisan Dream Act

Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:00:00 -0400

In a bipartisan move, two senators announced Thursday their intention to grant legal status to a group of undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, commonly referred to as "DREAMers."

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., introduced the legislation which would allow certain young immigrants the chance to earn permanent residency in the U.S. and be provided with a pathway toward citizenship.

“We don’t believe that young people should be held responsible for the errors or the illegal actions of their parents,” Durbin told reporters Thursday.

An emotional Graham pleaded with the GOP and President Donald Trump to protect the more than 1 million immigrants who he said were brought to the U.S. as children.

“President Trump, as you fix a broken immigration system, remember that you have the power to fix lives as well. Use that power,” Graham said during a press conference about the bill Thursday afternoon.

The South Carolinian praised the Trump administration for focusing on “getting the ‘bad hombres’ out of the country” and pushing to secure the border.

“The question for the Republican Party is, what do we tell these people? How do we treat them,” he said. “Here’s my answer: we treat them fairly, we do not pull the rug out from under them.”

Durbin acknowledged that this isn’t the first time lawmakers have tried to pass this legislation – but that it has ultimately failed. The legislation proposed Thursday is very similar to past Dream Acts.

“We need the Dream Act now more than ever because of the uncertainty that these young people face in America,” he said.

The bipartisan legislation applies to DREAMers who were brought to the U.S. as children and have been residents in the country for a long time, graduated from high school or obtained a GED and passed a series of background checks.

It also requires immigrants to work toward a college degree, serve in the military or be lawfully employed for at least three years. It would not be applicable to anyone who has committed a felony or poses a threat to the U.S.

And immigrants would have to pay a “reasonable” application fee, a person who worked on the legislation told ӣ��Ƶ.

Daniel Garza, president of the nonpartisan Libre Initiative, told ӣ��Ƶ that he is glad to see bipartisan legislation on immigration put forth because “consensus is key.”

“At the end of the day, Democrats don’t get to define what immigration reform is, and neither do Republicans,” Garza said. “There has to be a very pragmatic approach to immigration reform with both sides.”

DACA RECIPIENT WHO CLAIMS TO BE FIRST ‘DREAMER’ DEPORTED UNDER TRUMP FILES SUIT

“These children did not consciously violate the law, and they’re trapped in limbo because of the actions of their parents,” Garza said. He added that his organization is supportive of “any reform that will give legality to law-abiding immigrants who entered through no fault of their own with their parents.”

Garza stressed the need for a more permanent solution – such as a law – when it comes to immigration and the fate of DREAMers. Former President Barack Obama’s executive order expanding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program – a memorandum that protects thousands of certain young immigrants from deportation – didn’t provide that sense of relief, but instead “caused a lot of turmoil and concern across the country for these children” because of its uncertainty, he said.

Kamal Essaheb, policy and advocacy director at the National Immigration Law Center, also praised the bipartisanship of the legislation but warned that it shouldn't take the place of DACA.

"The legislation would provide a necessary, longer-term solution for immigrant youth who have fought for the ability to work, go to school, and live without fear of deportation," Essaheb said, adding that a bill shouldn't "diminish the critical importance of DACA, which has fundamentally enhanced the lives of nearly 800,000 people, including my own."

Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles director of communications Jorge-Mario Cabrera said that his organization, “from the looks of it,” supports the legislation introduced Thursday.

“We would be supportive of a permanent solution to save DACA,” Cabrera told ӣ��Ƶ, adding that CHIRLA would want a “clean bill” with “no more enforcement.”

Under the Trump administration, the fate of the so-called DREAMers is uncertain. A White House official told McClatchy this week that President Donald Trump would be unlikely to sign the legislation introduced by Durbin and Graham Thursday.

White House legislative affairs director Marc Short seemingly echoed that sentiment during an off-camera briefing Wednesday as well.

“The administration has opposed the DREAM Act, and we are likely to be consistent in that,” he said.

But Durbin said Thursday that he and Graham have been “actively engaged with the White House” for several weeks about immigration issues, and there are “people within the White House who want to continue this dialogue and conversation.”

“We’re not giving up on … appealing to the administration to join us in this effort,” Durbin said.

ARIZONA REGENTS TO OFFER IN-STATE TUITION TO SOME IMMIGRANTS

Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly told members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus last week that he believed DACA is likely illegal – although he is personally supportive of the program.

A group of attorneys general have called on the Trump administration to rescind the program. They have threatened to file a lawsuit to challenge DACA unless the Trump administration takes its own action to phase it out.

“I was encouraged that Secretary Kelly said he personally supports the DACA policy,” Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, told ӣ��Ƶ. “But, you know, also discouraged that he couldn’t say the administration would defend it or not.”

The legislation put forth Thursday by Graham and Durbin is similar to previous Dream Act guidelines.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Immigrant mother who sought sanctuary in church granted deportation stay

Wed, 26 Jul 2017 19:00:00 -0400

A Connecticut housekeeper and mother of four who sought sanctuary in a New Haven church has been granted an emergency stay of a deportation order that would have returned her to her native Guatemala.

Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy said Wednesday that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had agreed to take another look at Nury Chavarria's case and a U.S. District Court judge issued the stay. Details of the stay were not immediately released.

"There was never a rational justification for Nury Chavarria to have been threatened with deportation and separated from her children," Malloy said, "and I applaud this decision by ICE and the court to allow her to continue living and working in the United States with her family."

The 43-year-old Chavarria, of Norwalk, had been fitted with an ankle bracelet last month and was supposed to be flown out of the United States last week. Instead, she fled to the Iglesia de Dios Pentecostal Church.

Chavarria entered the U.S. in 1993, but was ordered deported by a federal immigration judge five years later. Fox61 reported that if she had complied with that order, she likely would have been able to gain legal re-admittance to the U.S.

Chavarria told Fox61 that she couldn't comply with the order due to the medical needs of her oldest son, now 21, who suffers from cerebral palsy.

Despite being denied asylum, Chavarria had been granted yearly deportation stays and work permits since 2009. It was not immediately clear why her status changed this year.

Click for more from Fox61.com.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Miami-Dade officials approve decision against 'sanctuary city' designation

Sat, 18 Feb 2017 09:35:00 -0500

County commissioners in immigrant-rich Miami-Dade voted Friday to uphold their Cuban-born mayor's order to cooperate with federal immigration officials, drawing shouts of "shame on you" from those hoping to make their community a sanctuary city.

Though it's the only U.S. county where more than half the population is foreign-born, Miami-Dade has bucked a trend among some cities that have sought to defy federal immigration crackdowns out of sympathy with their large migrant populations.

The commissioners, voting 9-3, backed the order of Mayor Carlos Gimenez that was delivered after the administration of President Donald Trump threatened to withhold federal funding from the so-called sanctuary cities.

"This is a country that opened arms to everyone, allowed opportunities to everyone. But this is also a country of law," county commissioner Rebeca Sosa, also of Cuban descent, said before the vote taken in a special public session. "I am so sad to see that people are afraid of something that has nothing to do with immigration. This was just a financial decision."

In emotional public testimony, dozens spoke against the order, including school-age children of deportees, young people brought to the U.S. without legal permission as children, construction workers, lawyers and rights activists.

At one point, four school-age girls and a boy stepped up to the podium holding hands with Nora Sandigo, who has a foundation that helps and houses children whose parents have been deported.

"These kids are orphans because they took their parents away from them. I can't stand this much pain," Sandigo said.

Many of the people gathered at the meeting stood and shouted obscenities at the commissioners when they voted to uphold the mayor.

Hatian-born Jean Monestime was among the three commissioners to vote against the motion.

"Today cannot be about money. It must be about justice," Monestime said. "It must be about dignity it must be about the spirit of our community."

The debate has highlighted a divide between Cuban-Americans and immigrants from other countries, stemming largely from a former immigration policy that gave preferential treatment to Cubans fleeing the island's communist government. For more than 50 years, Cubans arrived to open arms in the U.S. and were able to become citizens much more easily than people from other countries.

"Cuban families, in a general way, haven't been as aware of what it means to be undocumented in this country," said Michael Bustamante, a Florida International University expert on contemporary Cuban history. "They have had a different process to achieve legal status. Not to say that they haven't faced other difficulties."

Miami-Dade counts 51.7 percent of its people as born abroad. But the share of immigrants living here without permission is lower than places like Houston or Atlanta, precisely because Cuban immigrants could quickly get employment authorization cards, a Social Security number and become legal residents.

But that's changed. In January, then President Barack Obama announced that Cubans without residency or visas would be treated as any other immigrant with similar status.

In 2013, Miami-Dade commissioners passed a resolution that local law enforcement officers would comply with federal immigration officials only in cases of serious charges or convictions and only when the federal government agreed to reimburse the county for holding an offender in jail for more than two days. Longer detention while awaiting deportation was costing local taxpayers, Miami-Dade officials said.

The move put the county on a list of sanctuaries in a 2016 Justice Department report. Gimenez contested the designation, and then on Jan. 26, a day after Trump announced he would strip federal funding from sanctuary cities, Gimenez sent a memo instructing the corrections director to honor all immigration detainer requests.

Gimenez defended his decision Friday and said the county's police were not actively chasing people or asking for their immigration status — they were only agreeing to hold people flagged by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He said that most of the 34 people who have been requested by immigration authorities had previously committed crimes.

"Look. I am an immigrant myself," Gimenez said. "I can assure our residents that I will not comply with any executive order that will unfairly put our law-abiding immigrants at risk."

But Maria Bilbao, a 51-year-old Argentine who has lived in the U.S. for 16 years and is now obtaining residency, said the commissioners' support of Gimenez's decision is an anti-immigrant stance.

"They are broadening ways in which immigration officials can deport families," she said. "How can they keep a clear conscience"

Cities, feds try to find 'common ground' in sanctuary debate

Wed, 29 Mar 2017 19:02:00 -0400

Emerging from a meeting with Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly Wednesday on the Trump Administration's plan to withhold federal grants to sanctuary jurisdictions, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti struck an optimistic tone: "What we're trying to find is common ground," he told reporters.

The policy, unveiled Monday at the White House by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, could hit sanctuary jurisdictions where it most hurts, by cutting off federal money for law enforcement equipment, victims' services, lab technology and more.

"We are opposed to any funding being taken away as a punitive measure," Montgomery County (Md.) Police Chief Tom Manger said.

But underlying local leaders' concerns is confusion about what constitutes a "sanctuary" jurisdiction or program.

The Center for Immigration Studies defines it as "a policy that is non-cooperative and obstructs immigration enforcement." The Center says 306 jurisdictions across the U.S. meet that definition, including Rockville, Md., where the city manager this week denied it offers sanctuary.

"A misperception has been circulated questioning whether Rockville complies with federal law. Absolutely we do," Robert Dispirito told citizens in a packed city council session.

Los Angeles is another city often cited as a sanctuary. "Nothing could be further from the truth," Garcetti told ӣ��Ƶ, "We work every single day with ICE and other folks to make sure with a judicial warrant that comes from a court with a probable cause suspicion that people are all the time given over and deported."

Stephen K. Benjamin, the mayor of Columbia, S.C., also defended big cities who do not check immigration status of residents during routine traffic stops or other minor infractions.

"We are not sanctuary cities. We are American cities. These threats of holding back funding from cities across America, these are taxpayer dollars," he said.

Austin, Texas Mayor Steve Adler explained the apparent parsing of the definition of sanctuary, and the legal standard that many local authorities use that markedly contrasts with the federal standard under the Trump Administration. "To be clear, somebody that is in this country undocumented has committed a civil violation. Not a criminal violation but a civil violation," he said.

Trump Administration officials believe that different standard has helped lead to the proliferation of illegal border crossings and what critics say is an increase in crime, lower public school educational standards and higher property tax increases to fund multi-lingual instructors and separate programs for non-English speaking students in public schools.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is not waiting for the Trump Administration policy to come to fruition. He has targeted Austin and surrounding Travis County, which he calls a sanctuary jurisdiction, by holding back state money.

He recently told ӣ��Ƶ, "I withdrew $1.5 million of funding from the governor's office to Travis County. On top of that, what the state of Texas is seeking to do is to make it so punishing for cities and counties that they simply cannot have sanctuary cities. What that includes is fines that could add up to about $9 million a year."

If any common ground were reached Wednesday, it was DHS's reassurance to mayors that the feds do not intend a broad sweep of illegals.

"We do not conduct sweeps. We do not conduct raids. We are looking for specific people," DHS spokesman David Lapan told ӣ��Ƶ.

DHS Secretary Kelly left Wednesday's closed door meeting without commenting, but Lapan also said DHS has not made any decisions on withholding funding until a clearer definition of sanctuary is reached. He added there is no timetable for that decision.

Bill O'Reilly: Media's treatment of Maryland high school rape 'beyond anything I have ever seen'

Wed, 22 Mar 2017 21:30:00 -0400

ӣ��Ƶ' Bill O'Reilly slammed the mainstream media on Wednesday's "The O'Reilly Factor" for ignoring the case of two immigrant teens, at least one of whom is in the U.S. illegally, accused of raping a Maryland high school student.

"ABC, NBC, CBS did not cover it on their nightly news broadcasts," O'Reilly said in his "Talking Points Memo." "CNN did not cover the Maryland story in primetime last night. Ditto MSNBC. That is beyond anything I have ever seen in my 40 years-plus of journalism."

PARENTS' EMOTIONS RAW IN WAKE OF RAPE AT MARYLAND HIGH SCHOOL

"We all know why," O'Reilly said. "Illegal immigration is a political issue." The host went on to accuse the media of "allowing the sanctuary [city] movement to pretty much run wild" by opposing President Donald Trump's hardline immigration policies.

O'Reilly warned that "many Americans have had enough of illegal immigration," saying that "the federal government has lost control over the immigration process, and ... many states and cities will not obey federal law, creating anarchy."

"[There] comes a time when citizens of any country have to demand justice, have to demand protection, demand the law be respected," O'Reilly said. "We have not, have not, come to that time yet in America."

Young immigrant detained shortly after speaking at news conference

Thu, 02 Mar 2017 18:00:00 -0500

Federal agents detained a young Argentinian immigrant just minutes after she criticized U.S. deportation policies at a news conference in Jackson, Mississippi.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested 22-year-old Daniela Vargas Wednesday as a friend was driving her home from the news conference, hosted by local immigration lawyers, churches and advocacy groups. At the event, she spoke about how agents had already come out to her family home on February 15, when they detained her father and brother.

According to ICE, agents did not take Daniela Vargas into custody last month because she told them she was covered by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. But the agency later determined Vargas’s DACA status was no longer current.

Vargas’s lawyers say financial constraints delayed their client’s application to renew her DACA status. But they say Vargas has been in the U.S. since her parents brought her here from Argentina at the age of 7.

“This is her culture,” said immigration attorney Abigail Peterson. “This is where her family is. This is where her friends are. This is the life that she knows. And she told me when I met with her that she would like the opportunity to go in the military if that becomes an option for DACA. I mean, she is someone who has a love for this country.”

Peterson said DACA recipients, undocumented immigrants who were brought into the country as minors, do not represent a high risk group that law enforcement should be targeting. She also expressed concern about the timing of Vargas’s arrest.

“Two weeks later, after she’s been in the media quite a bit, for them to now arrest her raises questions as to the incentive behind it,” Peterson said.

“Every day, as part of routine targeted enforcement operations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Fugitive Operations teams arrest criminal aliens and other individuals who are in violation of our nation’s immigration laws,” ICE Public Affairs Officer Thomas Byrd explained in a written statement. “ICE conducts targeted immigration enforcement in compliance with federal law and agency policy. ICE does not conduct sweeps or raids that target aliens indiscriminately.”

Vargas remains in federal custody as she awaits a hearing before an immigration judge. Jordan Sanders, a friend who was with Vargas at the time of her arrest, expressed disbelief.

“She has no criminal history,” Sanders said. “She's great. I just don’t understand why it's happening to her.”

ӣ��Ƶ’ Willie Inman and Chip Bell contributed to this report.

GOP-led House backs legal challenge to Obama on immigration

Thu, 17 Mar 2016 12:50:00 -0400

The House voted on Thursday to embrace the legal challenge to President Barack Obama's actions on immigration in an election-year fight over executive authority and the 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally that has roiled the Republican Party.

Republicans who hold a commanding majority cast the issue as Obama exceeding his constitutional authority in unilaterally expanding programs for immigrants. They prevailed on a 234-186 vote that authorizes Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to file a friend-of-the-court brief in the case of United States v. Texas.

Twenty-six states, led by Texas, have filed a lawsuit challenging Obama's actions, with the Supreme Court set to hear arguments next month and possibly rule in June.

"It is about the integrity of our Constitution," said Ryan, who maintained that any changes in the immigration system rests with Congress acting legislatively. "Those lines -- that separation of powers -- could not be clearer. But in recent years, the executive branch has blurred these boundaries, to the point of overstepping them altogether."

Democrats argued that Republicans are following the lead of GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump. He has called for removing millions of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, accused some Mexican immigrants of being rapists and murderers, and pledged to get Mexico to build a wall along the U.S. border.

Immigration bitterly divided the GOP presidential candidates, with Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio calling on candidates to soften their tone. Bush quit the presidential race last month and Rubio abandoned his bid on Tuesday.

"Why does the majority party not just say what they want? They want millions of immigrants deported," said Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill. "Out on the campaign trail on immigration we get lies and demagoguery from Republicans -- plural."

After losing the Hispanic vote badly in the 2012 election, Republican leaders insisted that the party needed to be more inclusive for a diverse electorate if the GOP had any hope of winning the presidency. A bipartisan group of senators, including Rubio, crafted a broad overhaul of immigration that boosted border security, increased visas for legal immigrants and a provided a path to citizenship for the 11 million immigrants living in the country illegally.

The Senate approved the legislation, but the measure stalled in the House despite initial efforts that were quickly abandoned by former Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, then-Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Ryan.

Faced with the failure of the legislation, Obama acted in late 2014 to allow people who have been in the United States more than five years and who have children in the country legally to "come out of the shadows and get right with the law." He also announced the expansion of a program that affects people who came here illegally as children.

"The president has the right to take these administrative actions under the law," House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Thursday on the House floor in arguing that former Republican President Ronald Reagan went further in his actions on immigration in the 1980s.

Outraged Republicans accused Obama of executive overreach and pointed to his previous steps to unilaterally change his health care law. The GOP complained that Obama was behaving like a monarch, a criticism that energizes Republican voters.

Senator Sessions: Obama wants immigration amnesty; your vote can stop it

Sun, 02 Nov 2014 19:30:42 -0500

A nation’s first loyalty must be to its own citizens.

But the immigration policies of President Obama and Congressional Democrats help only billionaire special interests, amnesty activists, and the citizens of other countries – while reducing jobs and pay for our own.

Every single Senate Democrat voted for the Obama-backed plan to provide immediate work permits to 12 million illegal immigrants – allowing them to compete for any job in America. This legislation would also double the rate at which low-wage guest workers are brought into the U.S. to fill jobs throughout the economy.

Further, the legislation would triple the rate of permanent immigration, giving lifetime work permits and citizenship to over 30 million immigrants over the next ten years.

[pullquote]

America already has the world’s most generous immigration policy. The foreign-born population is at record levels, quadrupling since 1970. Since 2000, the U.S. has issued nearly 30 million lawful visas to foreign guest workers and permanent immigrants. During that time, all net employment gains among the working-age went to immigrant workers.

This large surplus of labor has also pulled down wages –family incomes are down more than $3,000 since 2009 alone.

Harvard Professor Dr. George Borjas estimates that our current high immigration rates result in a wage loss of $402 billion every year for competing American workers.

Imagine then what will happen if we double the supply of foreign labor. For many Americans, who will be pushed out of the workforce altogether, their wages will be reduced to zero.

Democrats running for Senate pour millions into ads complaining special interests have too much influence. And yet every Senate Democrat candidate has voted for the crown jewel of the corporate lobbyist agenda: mass amnesty and uncontrolled immigration.

Their plan is championed by open borders billionaires like Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg – global CEOs who don’t think you’re entitled to the same protections their gates and fences provide them.

In fact, these immigration lobbyists have so little regard for you, that they are meeting in secret with the White House right now to plan executive amnesty orders. These orders, planned for after the election, would implement, by executive fiat, the sweeping amnesty that was rejected by the Republican House.

The planned order would include work permits for millions of illegal immigrants while substantially boosting the supply of new foreign labor– taking precious jobs directly from struggling Americans.

Efforts by Republican Senators to block this illegal amnesty were repeatedly thwarted by Leader Harry Reid’s Senate Democrat majority.

Immigration enforcement has already been decimated. Interior removals have plummeted more than 40% since 2009. Forty thousand illegal immigrant family members who had just recently crossed the border were released by the feds and failed, predictably, to appear in court. People just show up at the border and are simply released into the country – free to claim local benefits funded by U.S. taxpayers.

Seventy percent of asylum applications show warning signs of fraud. ICE officers report that they are barred from enforcing immigration law against the millions who illegally overstay their visas – a number surging every single day.

Internal DHS documents show that there are 167,000 convicted criminal aliens who were ordered deported but are at large in the U.S. and released from custody.

The administration’s non-enforcement directives have placed almost the entire illegal immigrant and overstay population beyond the reach of law enforcement. The president’s own former ICE director explained: “If you are a run-of-the-mill immigrant here illegally, your odds of getting deported are close to zero.”

If the president’s promised executive amnesty goes through, we will functionally have open borders in America.

But the citizens of this country, through their vote, have the power to stop it.

The elite denizens of Washington and Wall Street scorn and mock the good and decent people of this country for wanting their laws enforced and their communities protected. They try to make you feel bad for having sensible and rational concerns about how uncontrolled immigration impacts your jobs, schools, neighborhoods, and community resources.

After years of mass immigration, falling wages, and surging joblessness, isn’t it time we focused on the needs of the people living here today? Isn’t it time we got our own people back to work?

But these cosmopolitan elites, these great citizens of the world, turn a blind eye to the suffering and poverty in their own backyards. These “Masters of the Universe” have forgotten that a nation owes its first loyalty to its own citizens.

And they want you to believe that you can't win.

But they are so wrong.

And with your vote, you have the power to prove them wrong. You have the power to deliver a message they won’t forget.

Obama's immigration amnesty: How GOP can reach Latino voters

Fri, 28 Nov 2014 11:04:31 -0500

President Obama’s immigration speech last Thursday had everything to do with cementing the Democratic Party’s hold on the Latino vote for 2016. And he is counting on the GOP to make it happen.

His strategy depends upon a chorus of Republican voices calling for the rounding up of 11 million people; thereby thrusting their (voting) friends and family into the arms of the Democratic party for a generation.

Had Obama felt ‘so deeply’ about this issue when he ran for president why then did he not pursue it when the Democrats had huge majorities in the House and Senate?

[pullquote]

Now with the election shellacking the Democrats took and with the Democrat coalition fraying it was time to stitch it back together with the twin tactics of baiting Republicans and pandering to a group.

During my military training I was taught that the best way to minimize the force of a punch that you cannot avoid is to lean into it. Since Obama is president there is no way to avoid his punches outright, but like Rocky Balboa the GOP can win the fight. Before I offer my suggestions on how the GOP might ultimately win the bout a few facts are in order:

- At the national level Democrats are afraid and the mainstream media won’t discuss it. Democrats won the Latino vote by 2-1 nationally; but both California and New York had essentially uncontested gubernatorial races masking the progress made by Republicans. In the heavily contested Senate and Gubernatorial races in Colorado, Texas, Georgia, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Kansas and Iowa the GOP averaged 43% of the Latino vote.

- The deportation issue for Latinos is all about family in a culture that values family above all else. Millions of Latino voters have relatives that are here illegally and fear being torn from their loved ones. While one may lament the lawlessness involved in granting amnesty, their feelings are understandable; and Obama is setting the GOP up to make Hispanic voters choose between it and their families. One doesn’t have to work with Latinos and have Latino friends to understand how that is going to work out.

Here is how the GOP can win:

1. Mind its tone in its reaction to Obama's executive action. Frame its response in terms of executive overreach as a matter of principle and not as being anti-immigrant. Many older Latinos remember the days of the PRI in Mexico and will understand these arguments as long as they see it as a struggle between a legislative body and a chief executive seeking to undermine democratic rule.

2. Pass an immigration bill that makes law abiding Latinos and their families feel safe. They are here in the U.S. and unless the Republican Party is willing to stake the fate of the Republic on rounding up 11 million people they aren’t going anywhere. However, according to an October Pew Hispanic an immigration bill that emphasizes border security for national security reasons is something 47% of Latino voters will accept.

Moreover, such a bill doesn’t have to be perfect in Latino eyes -- fifty-four percent of Latino voters would pull the lever for a candidate who disagrees with them on immigration issues but agrees with them on most other issues.

3. Talk about the issues that matter to Latino voters! The economy and jobs are the number one issue (49%) followed by health care, education and immigration. Interestingly, (and anecdotally) many of my Latino friends are very unhappy with the state of the schools their children attend and the indifference with which they are treated by the government schools’ bureaucracy. They were appalled when I explained the relationship between public employee unions and politicians in California and why parental input just did not matter in the public school system.

The Democrats’ beholden to public employee unions and the GOP view that parental and local control are best when it comes to education is a powerful contrast that should be stressed in Republican messaging.

4. Further, specific and meaningful proposals for job creation and economic opportunity will improve the GOP’s image in Latino eyes.

5. Finally, the GOP should continue to build on the Republican National Committee’s superb work in Latino outreach this cycle by encouraging local and State Central committees to participate in local projects important to Latino voters.

The foundation operated by my businesses has done just that here in liberal Sonoma County by helping with after school tutoring centers; English language classes; microloans and small business incubators.

The left should not have a monopoly on grass roots "community organizing."

The GOP and outside groups should commit to proving their intentions by deed rather than word that it is the party that will help Latinos achieve their dreams. The Latino community is very digitally sophisticated and word will get out.

If this type of interaction by Republican groups were to happen at the grass roots level in hundreds of counties across the country it is the Democrats who will be wondering if they will ever win the White House again.

Immigration debate: What would George Washington do?

Wed, 26 Nov 2014 16:00:49 -0500

As we celebrate Thanksgiving, we continue the tradition started by America’s early immigrants. Those intrepid settlers’ success creating a new society helped spur waves of immigration that continue to this day.

As we renew the debate over immigration policy, our history provides guidance for how we might effectively champion our immigrant heritage while promoting domestic prosperity. [pullquote]

The Pilgrims’ tradition of Thanksgiving continued as the first fledgling settlements took root in the New World and flourished into the independent United States of the late 18th century. Whether they were descended from early colonists or were more recently off the boat, our founding generation enjoyed a unique heritage – their national DNA was comprised of individuals who had braved hardships in order to find a better life. But not everyone was welcome to join them.

Immigration policy has always been a balancing act in the United States. Since our beginning, we have struggled with whom to let in. Our nation’s first leaders took a rather practical stance – they welcomed only those who would benefit the nation.

Legal immigration was viewed positively. But for all their idealistic words about “the wise policy of these states to extend the protection of their laws to all . . . and to admit them to a participation of civil and religious freedom,” our first leaders were also utilitarian.

The nation’s first immigration law, the Naturalization Act of 1790, was passed by Congress and duly executed by President George Washington.

Faithfully abiding by Congress’s law, President Washington welcomed people “of good moral character” who would better the country while readily assimilating with its culture.

He grandly proclaimed that “The bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respectable stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions, whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges,” but he added “if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.” That was an important “if.”

While the Founders were far from a monolithic group, the notion of accepting those who would 1. contribute, and 2. assimilate, was a fairly common one.

James Madison summed up their rationale: “It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle among us . . . . But why is this desirable? Not merely to swell the catalogue of people. No, sir, it is to increase the wealth and strength of the community.” He wanted to include those beneficial individuals “without adding . . . the people we are [not] in want of.” But how did they sort the “worthy” from the unworthy?

Alexander Hamilton, an immigrant himself, favored a trial period. He wrote, “The influx of foreigners … tend[s] to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities.”

Therefore, he wanted the individuals to prove themselves over time. “Some reasonable term ought to be allowed to enable aliens to get rid of foreign and acquire American attachments; to learn the principles and imbibe the spirit of our government; and to admit of a probability at least, of their feeling a real interest in our affairs. A residence of not less than five years ought to be required.”

In fact, the Naturalization Act of 1798 required 14 years of residence. Citizenship was something to be earned through a lengthy legal process.

According to the founding generation, potential citizens might demonstrate their commitment to integration by obeying laws, learning English, and contributing to the American economy.

As a proponent of industrialization, Hamilton was particularly eager to welcome those with knowledge of new British industrial techniques – a parallel to the U.S. economy’s demand for today’s highly skilled “new economy” workers. But the broader analogy works for any area of the economy that requires labor, whether skilled or otherwise.

As we seek to amend our failing immigration policy, these precedents provide guidance. We have obviously progressed, broadening the understanding of citizenship beyond white men, but our first leaders’ fundamental principles of citizenship might still be instructive within today’s evolved social context.

Our Founders’ words suggest we might adopt policies that welcome industrious, law-abiding individuals who will not only benefit the nation by filling particular social or economic roles but who will also assimilate into the broader American culture.

The "New Colossus" sonnet inscribed on the Statue of Liberty was not written for a century after America’s founding. But if our Founders had written it, they might instead have added a practical (and provocative) caveat, instead saying ‘"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free . . . as long as they will assimilate and benefit the country.”

Obama's immigration amnesty: Why aren't African-Americans outraged by president's actions?

Tue, 25 Nov 2014 09:28:07 -0500

Addressing the nation last Thursday, President Obama sought to justify his misreading of the Constitution by unilaterally granting legal protection to 5 million illegal immigrants. In this, he reminded me of what Richard Nixon told David Frost in a 1977 interview. The exchange is worth recalling:

"FROST: So what in a sense you're saying is that there are certain situations ... where the president can decide that it's in the best interests of the nation or something, and do something illegal.

NIXON: Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal.

FROST: By definition.

NIXON: Exactly. Exactly."

The framers of the U.S. Constitution sought to limit the power of government and expand individual liberty. President Obama sees it the other way. Whether he violated the constitutional limits of his power will be debated and possibly decided in the courts and by the new Republican majority in Congress, but there is another issue surrounding the president's amnesty order that needs addressing.

The unemployment rate among African-Americans is twice that of whites, which is why they should be outraged by the president's action.

Don't African-Americans "dream" of a better life? Of course they do. Then why hasn't the president focused on repairing their families, reducing crime in cities like Chicago where he launched his political career and allowing members of his race to escape from failed public schools that are robbing them of a future?

The conservative African-American organization (yes, one exists) called "Project 21" has compiled some comments from conservative black leadership.

Joe R. Hicks is the former executive director for the Southern Christian Leadership Conference chapter in Los Angeles. In response to the president's address, Hicks said: "President Obama strode into the White House promising to give the American people the audacity of hope. What we are witnessing instead, with his immigration agenda, is an audacious grab for power and an evisceration of the Constitution."

Talk radio host Stacy Washington: "Every time this country has pardoned illegal immigrants, crime and black unemployment have gone through the roof. Don't believe me? Check the statistics from Reagan's congressionally approved amnesty package. Not only did three times as many illegal immigrants as were promised become legal through the undiscovered intricacies of chain immigration, but the crime soared and black unemployment went through the roof."

To Washington's point, black unemployment, which declined during the years of George W. Bush's presidency, has increased during six years of the Obama administration, according to figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Federal Reserve. One might reasonably expect that America's first African-American president would be more attuned to the problems of actual citizens than to noncitizens.

Charles Butler, another black conservative talk radio host, was even blunter: "President Obama will do with the stroke of a pen what 300 years of slavery, Jim Crow and legal segregation could not: destroy the hopes and dreams of millions of black Americans."

Apparently the president thinks that since he won more than 90 percent of the black vote in his two elections and the Democratic Party can count on their loyalty for the foreseeable future, he can begin "importing" new voters, who will surely be granted that right when Democrats bring up "fairness." As Rush Limbaugh noted on his show last week, if attracting new Democratic voters is not the primary motivation for amnesty, let Congress draft a bill that won't allow them to vote for 20 years and see how Democrats react.

This president has done little to improve the conditions of African-Americans, and yet they do not hold him accountable. The reason why is a mystery. Instead of planning demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri, African-Americans should protest outside the White House. The president likes to call the illegals "dreamers." For millions of unemployed, underemployed and otherwise working African-Americans who have children trapped in failing schools because Democratic politicians won't let them escape, their dreams have become a nightmare.

President Obama = The very definition of a lawless leader

Mon, 24 Nov 2014 08:17:07 -0500

The short bios in The New York Post and other places featuring immigrants who are in the United State illegally were fascinating. I was struck by their courage to leave their homelands, their pluck at navigating a new culture and their patience in waiting for America’s official welcome mat.

Something else struck me, too. Not a single one expressed remorse for jumping the fence or overstaying visas. The law was simply a nuisance, an unfair barrier to their right to live in America, and they felt no qualms about violating it.

Some of these immigrants, including one woman who sneaked in from Mexico 18 years ago, even complained that presidential amnesty doesn’t include free health care.

“It isn’t fair,” Graciela Flores whined.

What luck — she and the other 5 million who benefit have found their soul mate in Barack Obama. He’s not into obeying laws, either. And he is endlessly entitled to whatever he wants, whenever he wants it.

Oh, sure, he has twice taken an oath to “faithfully execute” the nation’s laws, and to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

But he’s not serious about oaths, either. As America has learned, his word is not his bond.

A president who cannot speak honestly and who finds the Constitution’s separation of powers an option he can ignore is the very definition of lawless.

To continue reading Michael Goodwin's column, click here.

Latest Amnesty News | ӣ����Ƶ

Turkish grad student who co-authored anti-Israel op-ed at Tufts self-deports after legal battle with DHS

WILL CHAMBERLAIN: 'Maryland Dad' is perfect example of why Rep Salazar's amnesty scam must fail

GOP Rep Randy Fine declares that deporting all illegal immigrants is the top way to make the US affordable

Their plan was a flood of illegal immigration. Our answer is an immigration moratorium

House Dems propose bill to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants

Biden's border crisis: What's the president's real plan and his ultimate endgame?

Sen. Tom Cotton: Dems' 'DACA-For-All' amnesty plan must be stopped

Republicans torch Biden over report that migrants released without court dates are disappearing into the US

Jim Jordan: 'Do you have free speech when only the left can define what can be said?'

What is DACA and what does the Trump administration want to do with it?

What is the DACA program?

How many people are affected by DACA?

What did the Trump administration do?

Do any DACA recipients serve in the military?

US needs immigration reform but Obama's plan undemocratic, unconstitutional

Is DACA deal headed for disaster?

Trump ends temporary immigration permits to Nicaraguans

Sens. Graham, Durbin introduce bipartisan Dream Act

Immigrant mother who sought sanctuary in church granted deportation stay

Miami-Dade officials approve decision against 'sanctuary city' designation

Cities, feds try to find 'common ground' in sanctuary debate

Bill O'Reilly: Media's treatment of Maryland high school rape 'beyond anything I have ever seen'

Young immigrant detained shortly after speaking at news conference

GOP-led House backs legal challenge to Obama on immigration

Senator Sessions: Obama wants immigration amnesty; your vote can stop it

Obama's immigration amnesty: How GOP can reach Latino voters

Immigration debate: What would George Washington do?

Obama's immigration amnesty: Why aren't African-Americans outraged by president's actions?

President Obama = The very definition of a lawless leader

Latest Amnesty News | ӣ��Ƶ