President Obama forced through his immigration plan with a desperate executive action. He has always favored 'style over substance' - I'm so tired of hearing about his 'legacy'.
Sorry Mr. President, no 'legacy' here. It wasn't your decision - Congress will vote on whether they stay or go.
Sorry Mr. President, no 'legacy' here. It wasn't your decision - Congress will vote on whether they stay or go.
12
I have two Canadian children who live during the week with their mother in Vancouver, British Columbia. They spend their weekends with me in Blaine, Washington. I am not allowed to live in Canada because I don't qualify for a Canadian "green card". I have to live by the rules and cross an international border every time I want to see my children. An inconvenience? Yes. But is it my legal right to live in Canada? No. So I abide by the rules, and I expect other people to do so as well, until such time as the rules change.
21
A data point I never see referenced is how much money leaves the country every week via Western Union, etc, sent home by immigrants, here both legally or not. Why not tax those funds at 25% to help defray the costs that they impose on us?
18
With all due respect to the NYTs editorial board, but many, if not most, of the children of these illegal immigrants were born in America for the express purpose of making it difficult for the government to have them leave. These parents are well schooled in how to confuse and complicate the U.S. legal system in ways that work to their advantage (not exactly rocket science}. They also count on the strong liberal agenda put forth by the Obama administration and like minded "progressives" in assisting them in their quest to use these legal complexities to remain in America. The U.S allows over one million immigrants to take up residence each year in our country, legally. Like in almost any legal case that contains an illegality at its core, no one should profit from breaking the law.
21
There are many comments here that take the stance that "rules" have been broken and enforcing them is just the normal thing to do. The "rules" had to be enforced long ago to make this stance hold any water. As it is, the huge number of undocumented presents a problem for which the "rules" were not designed and cannot be used to correct the matter. President Obama's effort denied by one court is a completely sensible first move to actually fix things. It has been rescinded, not on the merits at all, but by a lonely judge who thinks the President overstepped his powers. The States that brought this action should be ashamed. Eventually this incorrect and miserable decision will be uprooted, but for now misery will prevail.
10
I'm just stunned that the NY Times was able to correctly frame the issue as about "unauthorized" immigrants.
6
Such is the power of the Republican's spite? So, if someone stands up for the laws of this country and refuses to reward people who openly break the immigration laws - that makes them spiteful? However broken the system may be today, it is still a system that an immigrant needs to follow. When millions of legal immigrants can toe the line, there is no excuse for wanting to reward those that don't. The Obama Administration has made a mockery of the laws of this country.
13
Funny how many of us forget or don't know or try to find out how our ancestors came to this country illegally , or worse, stole land and resources from the natives already living here for thousands of years. Justice and fairness can be a squirrelly thing. OK when we did it to get ahead but bad when someone else does it, especially if they're different from me.
7
A Nation of Immigrants has turned its back on immigrants who are too poor to ever be able to afford legal immigration. But, these people do some of the hardest work in our country and all they are seeking is what we all want ... a better life for their children. Shame on this Court and shame on those who see this as a defeat for Obama and are glad ... this is a defeat for all of us and a shame upon what our country has always stood for!
7
The insanity has to stop. Nations have a right to their own sovereignty and control of their borders, including the USA. Obama's plan was just another step towards amnesty and open borders.
23
Either we have a country or we don't!
14
Domald Trump is obviously an egotistical, empty headed, opportunist. Yet, I am tempted to vote for him on this one issue. The idea that our country needs 15 million illegal immigrants to "do jobs that citizens reject" is bankrupt.
Illegals displace citizens by working "off the books" in a cash economy. Their low wages are further subsidized by extensively drawing upon social services. They pay no taxes because their wages are invisible to tax policies. Ironically, this deepens their entitlements to social services.
Many come from countries where the rule of law is considered "optional". Much like Greece, where "anyone who pays taxes is deemed a fool".
Brexit was caused ( in part ) by voters watching the slow suffocation of German hamlets by waves of immigrants. Britons wanted hold onto their identity and retain the integrity of their social safety net.
Illegals displace citizens by working "off the books" in a cash economy. Their low wages are further subsidized by extensively drawing upon social services. They pay no taxes because their wages are invisible to tax policies. Ironically, this deepens their entitlements to social services.
Many come from countries where the rule of law is considered "optional". Much like Greece, where "anyone who pays taxes is deemed a fool".
Brexit was caused ( in part ) by voters watching the slow suffocation of German hamlets by waves of immigrants. Britons wanted hold onto their identity and retain the integrity of their social safety net.
21
How much difference is there between what Obama wanted and what Reagan did when he granted amnesty?
10
Republicans who have attacked Mr. Obama at every turn concocted a counterargument. They accused him of abusing his powers, violating administrative law and harming states that would incur incidental expenses under the program.
-------------------------------------
CONCOCTED counterargument, you say? So, you think that the states would not incur additional costs in providing services to the newly minted quasi-legal, if not legal, aliens?
Obama's actions should be informed by the laws of the land, not by any political consideration that Latinos, as a group, tend to vote for Democrats in elections.
Panderer-in-chief.
Heartbreak for Obama and like-minded myrmidons who drink his koolaid. We are a nation of laws and ought to remain that way.
End of story. Good night, moon.
-------------------------------------
CONCOCTED counterargument, you say? So, you think that the states would not incur additional costs in providing services to the newly minted quasi-legal, if not legal, aliens?
Obama's actions should be informed by the laws of the land, not by any political consideration that Latinos, as a group, tend to vote for Democrats in elections.
Panderer-in-chief.
Heartbreak for Obama and like-minded myrmidons who drink his koolaid. We are a nation of laws and ought to remain that way.
End of story. Good night, moon.
24
How is it heartbreaking that America is a nation of laws and not an Obama dictatorship?
I'm sure Stalin was heartbroken when he couldn't rule the entire world. The same for Adolf and other tyrants. I am a Black lawyer in Washington DC, and I've been here since graduating from law school and moving to DC for work. Obama has done this his entire 2nd term in office, and he warned that he would--enacted unconstitutional, illegal executive actions making himself Congress and POTUS.
Obama did it with the Bergdahl swap, violating an act of Congress WRITTEN to stop him from freeing GITMO detainees without consulting with Congress. Let me be clear. If any of you reading this newspaper violated an act of Congress, you'd be in federal custody or in the cross hairs.
Go ahead. Skip out on your taxes. Violate interstate commerce laws and transport weapons somewhere. Commit an act of terror. See what happens. Barack Obama sits in the Oval Office, thumbing his nose at the Constitution, and the American people as if he is above the law.
Yesterday the Supreme Court put a stop to it.
If only in the 11th hour when it really doesn't matter...justice prevails nonetheless.
I'm sure Stalin was heartbroken when he couldn't rule the entire world. The same for Adolf and other tyrants. I am a Black lawyer in Washington DC, and I've been here since graduating from law school and moving to DC for work. Obama has done this his entire 2nd term in office, and he warned that he would--enacted unconstitutional, illegal executive actions making himself Congress and POTUS.
Obama did it with the Bergdahl swap, violating an act of Congress WRITTEN to stop him from freeing GITMO detainees without consulting with Congress. Let me be clear. If any of you reading this newspaper violated an act of Congress, you'd be in federal custody or in the cross hairs.
Go ahead. Skip out on your taxes. Violate interstate commerce laws and transport weapons somewhere. Commit an act of terror. See what happens. Barack Obama sits in the Oval Office, thumbing his nose at the Constitution, and the American people as if he is above the law.
Yesterday the Supreme Court put a stop to it.
If only in the 11th hour when it really doesn't matter...justice prevails nonetheless.
24
Concocted an argument....You mean the truth. We don't know if our immigration laws are broken. We don't enforce them so how would we know?
15
The children of illegal immigrants are coming of age with their college degrees now and will be competing with citizens' children for good-paying jobs instead of those chicken-factory, motel cleaning and lawn maintenance jobs their parents hold. The middle class Democrats who have felt compassion and advocated for legal status those "hard-working" illegals will feel differently when their children get the good jobs their own children took out college loans to prepare for. BTW aside from their college degrees, the illegals' children are bilingual in Spanish, which is an asset to employers who make money off of or serve the Latino immigrant community. All else being equal, what employer wouldn't prefer the bilingual applicant?
10
Of course they can't work legally. They aren't legally present in this country!
Why are both Democrats and Republicans so schizophrenic on the subject of illegal "immigration"?
(1) Republicans really don't want to enforce the law, to make it harder for employers to hire illegal workers, yet they constantly cry about the growth of entitlements and the need to raise taxes to pay for it. Haven't they bothered to look at who is increasingly on the entitlement rolls?
(2) Democrats want to protect illegal "immigrants" while decrying the use of H1-B workers to replace American workers. It's precisely the same dynamic: replacing Americans with lower cost, more subservient foreigners. Illegal "immigration" is the "progressives'" bete noir Wal-Mart issue -- on steroids. Private benefit with socialized cost.
The only path forward to having a functioning immigration system -- ever, of any design -- is enforcement. The longer we tell the world that the lawbreaking we have allowed to go on for so long will continue, the bigger our illegal "immigration" problem with become.
And, as long as we continue to have the lunacy of Birthright Citizenship, illegal "immigrants" can continue to have kids at taxpayer expense, have them supported by the taxpayer, and use them to try to extort legalization for themselves.
Why are both Democrats and Republicans so schizophrenic on the subject of illegal "immigration"?
(1) Republicans really don't want to enforce the law, to make it harder for employers to hire illegal workers, yet they constantly cry about the growth of entitlements and the need to raise taxes to pay for it. Haven't they bothered to look at who is increasingly on the entitlement rolls?
(2) Democrats want to protect illegal "immigrants" while decrying the use of H1-B workers to replace American workers. It's precisely the same dynamic: replacing Americans with lower cost, more subservient foreigners. Illegal "immigration" is the "progressives'" bete noir Wal-Mart issue -- on steroids. Private benefit with socialized cost.
The only path forward to having a functioning immigration system -- ever, of any design -- is enforcement. The longer we tell the world that the lawbreaking we have allowed to go on for so long will continue, the bigger our illegal "immigration" problem with become.
And, as long as we continue to have the lunacy of Birthright Citizenship, illegal "immigrants" can continue to have kids at taxpayer expense, have them supported by the taxpayer, and use them to try to extort legalization for themselves.
16
Why do we have immigration laws if four liberal judges voted for this?
9
I like how this piece is signed by "the editorial board", even individuals at the Times refuse to take responsibility for their work. So editorial board, let me address you..all. Britain has shown us that its people think that borders exist for a reason. While America has always been a country of immigrants and our culture deals with that (note I dont say celebrate because it's not always a positive experience) we also believe that people who come here follow the rule of law and do so legally. Immigrants may be tired, poor, wretched refuse, but if they come here legally, they are welcome. Illegals are not. If we welcome illegals, we might as well save our money on border guards and open up the US to unfettered access. I think the President overreached here and while his intentions may have been humanitarian, one cannot overlook the political advantage gained by democrats by winning over this demographic (Im a democrat). Perhaps we should put this and maybe a few dozen other things to a national referendum like they did across the pond. God knows, I don't think the electorate can do a worse job than those they have elected and unlike our representatives, we have to live with and pay for our mistakes.
10
Does the Republican Party have no decency or honor left? Unwilling to govern, they fall back on negative behaviors which are often racist and cruel. I pray daily they will finally be defeated this November.
4
So much anger being expressed here. So many saying those here illegally should just go home, follow the law, and come back legally, as if it were that simple. Never mind that many have been here for decades. Never mind that they own homes, work and pay taxes, and fill jobs no one else is willing to do. Never mind that their children are U.S. citizens who live in constant fear that their parents will be taken away. Never mind that the reason many came here in the first place was to escape political repression. Never mind that the U.S. supported brutal dictatorships like the ones in El Salvador and Guatemala. Never mind the gangs now terrorizing Central America came from the U.S. Never mind.
4
It's getting difficult to keep up with the double-speak. Amnesty, a term introduced by Reagan in sweeping immigration reforms of 1986, is now used in a derogatory manner. Meanwhile, laws that allow individuals to cross into our boarders seeking refuge (asylum) are seemingly forgotten, having been relabeled as illegal. Man's inhumanity to man knows no boundaries, and thus, the tired and the weary find no rest on our shores. How very shameful.
4
The proposal protected immigrants who have lived here for decades and have children and grandchildren. The people who are against this policy are the same ones who eat at restaurants whose cooks are immigrants, stay in hotels whose staff are immigrants, whose trash is picked up by immigrants, whose food is picked by immigrants. The average American is too overweight and unfit to perform any of these tasks. They would not work in 100 degree temperatures to perform any of these tasks. Good luck when the food supply and services are halted. The average American has no idea how the country works. Their expertise comes from guys and babes chosen for their looks rather than intellect. The Middle East had Arab Spring - the West will learn the penalty of listening to to the uneducated.
3
Separate but equally dysfunctional branches of the United States Government! When the Supreme Court has become politically divided this kind of outcome becomes more visible on the eight-member Supreme Court.
2
Any heartbreak for the children is 100% the responsibility of their parents. Not the Courts, Not the Republicans. Not Donald Trump.
When the parents came to this country illegally they new they were breaking the law. They knew, or should have known, the risks and consequences of their decision. Yes the children born here are American citizens, but the parents broke the law and must suffer the consequences of breaking the law.
I understand the parents are left with a difficult decision. Leave the children behind or take them back to their home country. However, the parents put themselves in this position based on a choice THEY made. In all walks of life children are affected by their parents choices, and illegal immigrants are no exception.
When the parents came to this country illegally they new they were breaking the law. They knew, or should have known, the risks and consequences of their decision. Yes the children born here are American citizens, but the parents broke the law and must suffer the consequences of breaking the law.
I understand the parents are left with a difficult decision. Leave the children behind or take them back to their home country. However, the parents put themselves in this position based on a choice THEY made. In all walks of life children are affected by their parents choices, and illegal immigrants are no exception.
20
JUSTICE Texas style. Despite the fact that TX is one states that has the highest number of immigrants from south of the border and benefits from cheap labor who pay taxes, they went out of their way to sabotage Obama's executive order that between 4 and 5 million upstanding residents with family members who are citizens or legal residents can remain with their families. So TX spiteful actions demonstrate the true meaning of their version of "traditional family values." The case went from the Texas court to the federal appeals court to the Supreme Court that could not break a tie decision because the GOP has refused to give Obama's candidate, Garland, a fair hearing, despite the fact that there are videos of them singing his praises as a fair and distinguished jurist. Once again, the GOP is destroying the lives of upstanding residents of the country because they continue to abuse their power so they can show utter disdain for the Office of the President of the US. Truman made a very strong distinction between his person and fulfilling his official presidential responsibilities, to the extent that he kept a roll of stamps in his desk with orders to his secretary to use them in his personal correspondence. Such was Truman's honoring his oath of office. The GOP has shown how awfully they can act and ignore their oaths of office in defying Obama at every turn out of sheer nastiness. Their actions are infantile. Their candidate, Trump, has frontal lobe dementia. WINNERS?
4
I feel no sympathy for those that have violated our borders and came her illegally. If they have been here for years why haven't they applied for citizenship? They have broken our immigration laws yet they want a free pass while those that are waiting and following the law continue to wait. They should be deported. As we come across them they should be sent back and they can get in line to apply legally We are too soft, and odur politicians are only looking at the next election.
16
It's always darkest before the dawn Mr. President. Have faith that a year from now President Hillary will have nominated you to the SCOTUS and a Democratic controlled Senate confirmed the appointment and favorable immigration law will pass. Know Republicans will be in disarray, still licking their wounds and Donald Trump will have been indicted for multiple violations of law.
5
More jobs for Americans who have no jobs and allowing those illegally in the United States to remain and occupy jobs is a Democratic Party dichotomy, truthfully they can't have both. For those who will troop out that old, tired and false canard this does not mean "stoop-labor" but the type of jobs that qualify for H visas. The jobs that Americans are losing to foreigners after they are required to train them.
We allow over one million foreigners to legally immigrate each and every year, more than any other country on earth, isn't that enough? Allow those illegally here to leave the same way they came in, a few at a time and give the jobs they vacate to Americans. Isn't that really what the Democratic Party wants us to believe, jobs for Americans?
We allow over one million foreigners to legally immigrate each and every year, more than any other country on earth, isn't that enough? Allow those illegally here to leave the same way they came in, a few at a time and give the jobs they vacate to Americans. Isn't that really what the Democratic Party wants us to believe, jobs for Americans?
17
"And so four million to five million people who might have been spared deportation remain stranded, vulnerable to arrest and unable to work legally." Uh duh. They are here illegally. One might expect someone in the midst of a criminal act to have more difficulty finding a job and may reasonably expect to be at risk of arrest. But, this makes me a racist apparently
20
The Presidents critics have obviously not spent much time visiting members of Congress, in this case visiting on behalf of immigration reform. The New Jersey Main Street Alliance joined with the Middlesex County Chamber of Commerce, a liberal business organization and a conservative one, to speak directly to New Jersey Congressional members on behalf of the Senate's bipartisan reform legislation. This is what we were told. There would be no vote, no proposal bought to the floor for debate, no reform. The reasons for that were made clear, Republican members, the controlling majority, were afraid of being "primaried" by right wing extremists in their districts and that a cabal of some 40 right wing extremists had what amounted to procedural veto power, dictating to the Speaker what would and would not be heard on the floor for debate, let a lone a vote. We heard almost to a member support for reform and majority support for a pathway to citizenship. These was not bleeding heart liberals, they were otherwise very conservative, intelligent, practical, politicians utterly hamstrung. Blaming this President for failing to find a compromise on this and many other important issues reveals only ignorance of the real politics of today, just as believing a President, whether Bernie or Trump or Hillary, will cure the nations ills is child like wishful thinking. Little progress is possible so long as just enough of the American electorate remains in the embrace of extremism.
5
There are certainly some cruel people in the U.S. Children who are born in this country may lose their families. Breaking up families doesn't bother these people? There are stories about infants with health problems who must stay in the US to receive treatments, while their parents may be deported. Children raised in this country with families who have lived here for many years, contributing to taxes and doing jobs that Americans don't work.
Of course, these same people support Trump, with his grandiose plans for impossible walls (which would cost about $25 billion) and a trail of tears from deporting 11 million people -- costing an additional estimated $400 to $600 billion. SS and Medicare are already in danger. Do these people think the US could actually afford Trump's plans without some economic collapse?
I did see one protester at a Trump rally holding a sign saying that Trump's immigrant wives did jobs no Americans would, so I guess that proves one point.
Of course, these same people support Trump, with his grandiose plans for impossible walls (which would cost about $25 billion) and a trail of tears from deporting 11 million people -- costing an additional estimated $400 to $600 billion. SS and Medicare are already in danger. Do these people think the US could actually afford Trump's plans without some economic collapse?
I did see one protester at a Trump rally holding a sign saying that Trump's immigrant wives did jobs no Americans would, so I guess that proves one point.
6
the courts have affirmed the view President Obama articulated in 2011
"America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the President, am obligated to enforce the law. I don't have a choice about that. That's part of my job. But I can advocate for changes in the law so that we have a country that is both respectful of the law but also continues to be a great nation of immigrants. … With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed …. [W]e’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws. There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.”
"America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the President, am obligated to enforce the law. I don't have a choice about that. That's part of my job. But I can advocate for changes in the law so that we have a country that is both respectful of the law but also continues to be a great nation of immigrants. … With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed …. [W]e’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws. There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.”
10
Could we start enforcing the hiring laws against those who knowingly hire these Illegal immigrants in the construction trades, landscaping, etc. At your local golf course are there any illegals doing the maintenance. How about your weekly yard cleanup? The stable where you or your kids ride? Go to any A rated horse show and the Immigration people could pick up van loads of grooms working for cash under the table, all paid by 1%ers who could easily pay proper wages to legal workers to care for their million dollar horses.
22
This shows more than ever that Americans must get out and vote and participate in the process and once and for all get the GOP out of the statehouses, the governors mansions, the Congress and the Senate. Clearly the actions in Texas by the Court were for no reason other than to discriminate against immigrants , to further the xenophobic agenda of the GOP and to embarrass , humiliate and thwart any effort by the President to serve the American people. This is further evidence of the consistent plot and concerted effort by the GOP and the conservative judiciary to ignore the will and the mandate of the people on so many issues simply because they despise the President, serve at the beck and call of special interests like the NRA, and want to make America white again.
1
This editorial is wrong for so many reasons - but let me just start with one:
Insert the work "illegal" before the word "immigrant" every time it's used in the editorial.
Insert the work "illegal" before the word "immigrant" every time it's used in the editorial.
14
Color me shocked: an extortionate editorial romanticizing the self-induced plight of illegal immigrants demanding that Americans pick up the tab! It must be Thursday all ready.
Given the intellectual incoherence and facile, hair splitting nature of Mr. Obama’s position— providing “undocumented” immigrants work authorizations without “legal status”— I am glad his sham fell through; no one here doubts that the former demands the latter, and Mr. Obama’s Justice Department would have sued any state into oblivion had they tried to call him on it by resisting giving these people state benefits. We all know the goal was amnesty. We all know the goal was shoring up another voting block based on identity politics. We all know. Even New York Times editorial writers know, I presume, but do not care because they would not pay the social, cultural, and financial costs of assimilating all these people overnight full stop. You and I would pay for it, gentle reader.
I guess it is time to give NumbersUSA another donation.
Given the intellectual incoherence and facile, hair splitting nature of Mr. Obama’s position— providing “undocumented” immigrants work authorizations without “legal status”— I am glad his sham fell through; no one here doubts that the former demands the latter, and Mr. Obama’s Justice Department would have sued any state into oblivion had they tried to call him on it by resisting giving these people state benefits. We all know the goal was amnesty. We all know the goal was shoring up another voting block based on identity politics. We all know. Even New York Times editorial writers know, I presume, but do not care because they would not pay the social, cultural, and financial costs of assimilating all these people overnight full stop. You and I would pay for it, gentle reader.
I guess it is time to give NumbersUSA another donation.
11
Mexit
8
'Of a Ministry pitiful, angry, mean
A gallant commander the victim is seen.
For promptitude, vigour, success does he stand
Condemn't to receive a severe reprimand!
To this foes I could wish a resemblance in fate:
That they, too, may suffer themselves, sooner or late,
The injustice they warrant. But vain is my spite,
They cannot so suffer who never do right'.
(Jane Austen)
A gallant commander the victim is seen.
For promptitude, vigour, success does he stand
Condemn't to receive a severe reprimand!
To this foes I could wish a resemblance in fate:
That they, too, may suffer themselves, sooner or late,
The injustice they warrant. But vain is my spite,
They cannot so suffer who never do right'.
(Jane Austen)
2
The failure of President Obama to pass Immigration reform legislation is his legacy.
A President's responsibility is to unite Americans and find bipartisan solutions to the country's problems.
He has done the opposite.
A President's responsibility is to unite Americans and find bipartisan solutions to the country's problems.
He has done the opposite.
6
The decision in England overnight, shows that the people of England have had it with the elites leading them by the nose, to penury, oblivious that unless they suspend the right for self-determination, the will of the people eventually prevails.
And so it is here, in the United States; the people know that unless they fight back hard for some little representation, they will continue to be ignored, and the elites will continue the process of beggaring the people.
Our corporate owned government had best take notice, or wake up next November to a nightmare.
And so it is here, in the United States; the people know that unless they fight back hard for some little representation, they will continue to be ignored, and the elites will continue the process of beggaring the people.
Our corporate owned government had best take notice, or wake up next November to a nightmare.
10
A complete failure of leadership.
1. Before the edict, he said over and over that he did not have the power or authority to unilaterally change the law.
2. Then, he decided that the rule of law can be by-passed because he doesn't want to wait for congress.
3. Then, instead of cobbling together a proposal that would garner the support of both democrats and republicans, he announces that he has a phone and a pen.
4. Then he is enjoined by a federal judge in implementing the program, but implements it anyway, having DOJ attorneys lie four different times to the Judge falsely reporting that it had not been implemented when in fact 100,000 had been processed.
5. So, who created the Heartbreak? Was it not the leader who grandstanded promising action for millions when the leader knew he could not do that? Was it not the leader who took action for 100,000 in contravention of an injunction and then lied to the Judge?
6. What kind of leader whines when he's slapped with the rule of law.
7. And don't blame it on Mitch McConnell and his pledge to block Obama's bad ideas. That is exactly the required role of the opposition party.
8. Perhaps the lesson is, even if the leader has a great idea, it cannot become law without Congress passing it first. Constitution 101.
1. Before the edict, he said over and over that he did not have the power or authority to unilaterally change the law.
2. Then, he decided that the rule of law can be by-passed because he doesn't want to wait for congress.
3. Then, instead of cobbling together a proposal that would garner the support of both democrats and republicans, he announces that he has a phone and a pen.
4. Then he is enjoined by a federal judge in implementing the program, but implements it anyway, having DOJ attorneys lie four different times to the Judge falsely reporting that it had not been implemented when in fact 100,000 had been processed.
5. So, who created the Heartbreak? Was it not the leader who grandstanded promising action for millions when the leader knew he could not do that? Was it not the leader who took action for 100,000 in contravention of an injunction and then lied to the Judge?
6. What kind of leader whines when he's slapped with the rule of law.
7. And don't blame it on Mitch McConnell and his pledge to block Obama's bad ideas. That is exactly the required role of the opposition party.
8. Perhaps the lesson is, even if the leader has a great idea, it cannot become law without Congress passing it first. Constitution 101.
13
He could come out swinging and make this a major election issue, making the case to elect HRC. I'm guessing he won't as his position isn't particularly popular with swing state voters.
1
A component of the undocumented immigration issue defies logic, because it hits a person right in the gut-- it's the emotional equivalent of someone breaking into your home.
4
How frightening this vote must be for those families who are fearing possible deportation after living so many years in the United States. President Obama did all he could possibly do to save families from an uncertain future. This is a sad note to the end of our president's 8 years in office. My heart is with you President Obama and for the families who will now live in fear.
4
The GOP hates Obama and now immigrants have to pay for the GOP's racism and hate. Many immigrants have worked in the US for decades without issue, and have raised children in the US without issue. They now face going "home" to foreign lands. Many immigrants are more "American" than my neighbors, because they appreciate America and the wonders it has to offer. The irony is that the stability and opportunity that America offers is broken down by this decision.
4
Someday the US will realise that giving so much power to arbitrary power to a group of unelected politicians, just because they call themselves judges, is farcical in the context of what claims to be the world's leading democracy.
Is there anyone naive enough to believe that the Supreme Court justices are anything other than partisan politicians - the fact that they can use clever legal language to justify their biases doesn't change that.
The role the Supreme Court serves today bears no resemblance to what the founders intended. Getting rid of it would be a huge step for justice and democracy.
Is there anyone naive enough to believe that the Supreme Court justices are anything other than partisan politicians - the fact that they can use clever legal language to justify their biases doesn't change that.
The role the Supreme Court serves today bears no resemblance to what the founders intended. Getting rid of it would be a huge step for justice and democracy.
4
Deporting undocumented immigrant parents and separating them from their children that were born here and are U.S. citizens will certainly do much for strengthening families and wisely utilizing law enforcement resources. You betcha!
3
Republican leaders are on a sandbar that they are confusing for an island. The world is changing around them, yet they deny it and fail to craft solutions opting instead for temporary political power. Had they done their job and solved problems rather than refusing to govern, they wouldn't be about to drown.
1
>As Mr. Obama said, the decision is “heartbreaking for the millions of immigrants..."<
No, Mr. President. They're illegal aliens.
Glad I could clear-up the confusion there.
No, Mr. President. They're illegal aliens.
Glad I could clear-up the confusion there.
11
So it might possibly be harder for "Progressive Elites" like those on the
Editorial Board of the New York Times to find un-documented immigrants to
clean their houses, take care of their kids, mow their lawns...
This just points out how necessary Immigration Reform is needed.
It does not good for anyone for un-documented immigrants to be admitted
with no guarantee that their employers will treat them decently and pay them
justly.
Fix the problem, stop trying to slip past the broken laws.
Editorial Board of the New York Times to find un-documented immigrants to
clean their houses, take care of their kids, mow their lawns...
This just points out how necessary Immigration Reform is needed.
It does not good for anyone for un-documented immigrants to be admitted
with no guarantee that their employers will treat them decently and pay them
justly.
Fix the problem, stop trying to slip past the broken laws.
8
The day I can enter any country I choose and be allowed to work, own a business, drive a car, send my children to public schools, get free medical care at public hospital emergency rooms and other public benefits, complete with interpreters and documents printed in my foreign language, is the day I will be "heartbroken" that illegal residents of this country must "live in limbo" and "a state of fear and frustration." What country can I go to, live freely for decades, greatly improve my standard of living, see my children prosper, and have such powerful advocates for me in its national government, pray tell?
11
To expel illegal immigrants is wrong for moral reasons. It would cause a number of US citizens, probably in the millions, to loose parents or relatives because they came here illegally. It would be logistically impossible. It would cost too much and it would put every Hispanic under suspicion of being here illegally.
It would be economically problematic. Hispanics are the main group keeping enough growth to replace older generations. Without them it would be very difficult to keep the economy working properly for lack of enough manpower, and the healthcare system for enough workers taking care of a growing number of retirees. And finally, it would have a civil and a political cost for the party treating us as unwelcome.
We are very aware of the need to control our borders and to keep real criminals away, those who endanger persons or property, not the ones looking for a decent job, paying taxes and staying away from trouble. We know the US cannot accommodate everybody. But we believe the illegals already here, who have been working and contributing to the country deserve the chance to stay.
It would be economically problematic. Hispanics are the main group keeping enough growth to replace older generations. Without them it would be very difficult to keep the economy working properly for lack of enough manpower, and the healthcare system for enough workers taking care of a growing number of retirees. And finally, it would have a civil and a political cost for the party treating us as unwelcome.
We are very aware of the need to control our borders and to keep real criminals away, those who endanger persons or property, not the ones looking for a decent job, paying taxes and staying away from trouble. We know the US cannot accommodate everybody. But we believe the illegals already here, who have been working and contributing to the country deserve the chance to stay.
2
"Temporary protection to unauthorized immigrants?" Can we at least use words to tell the truth and not to obfuscate? Obama is playing politics with the immigration system. He is not looking for a credible temporary solution to the problem but is obviously only playing for time during which illegals will become even more entrenched. Or do we believe they will ever just peacefully go when their time is up? So let's just look at Obama's tactic for what it is--a play to keep illegals here forever. Now he is putting on a big act about how heartbroken he is by this recent development as if the illegals won't stay here anyway in disregard for the law the way they have always been from the start.
11
Today's vote was not only a disappointment to immigrants. It was also a disappointment to those who hold an idealized view of the American Dream, which at the hands of Republicans has turned into an American mirage and an American nightmare. The Supreme Court's decision has made it very clear: racism is as much a bedrock of America's "values", as much as guns and the ruthless games of vulture capitalism. America does no longer feel the need to hide behind its fictions, as witnessed by the Republicans' choice for presidential candidate and their continued blocking of
a dream no one is really dreaming anymore.
a dream no one is really dreaming anymore.
1
The NYT editorial board should pay attention to what happened in Britain today. The president, while "greatly expanding what he achieved with DACA, which has allowed about 730,000 immigrants to work" has actually taken 730,000 jobs away from legal citizens. The country should be enforcing the laws that exist and if people want the laws to be changed it should not be by executive order. Pay attention NYT, the British electorate has spoken and if you read the comments, you should know that even your liberal readership is tired of being lectured to by the elite snobs whose only interaction with illegal aliens is to give them cash at the end of a day of cleaning or mowing their lawn. Those of us in the middle know what they have done to wages and jobs in this country. We don't need a study, or data, we just know. Just as the British people know, because we see it every day in the real world. If you come here illegally, you need to be deported and the message should be clear, once you have committed an illegal act, your chances of living here legally are gone. And, if you hire an illegal immigrant, you will be fined enough to cover the cost of deporting that illegal immigrant.
8
Uninvited means unwelcome. That pertains to anyone who drifts into another sovereign nation to take advantage of its perceived or actual opportunities. That pertains also to those whose insistence on speaking their own language and disregarding American values such as democracy and gender equality mark their every attitude and action. What does one not understand about the word "illegal"? These millions of people are felons, having violated Title 8 of United States Code as it pertains to immigration, and have no status in our country. High time indeed that we removed them from our midst and permitted those born here into poverty to have a better chance to move up.
11
What is it like to talk about human beings as if they do not have hearts and souls? Where's the humanity?
1
No "Heartbreak" here. Too many immigrants already. Close the borders - with 350 million the last thing the US needs or can absorb are more immigrants.
11
This whole issue needs to be handled by congress. The President tried to do something out of frustration because he sees and acknowledges a problem the most try to pretend does not exists. The GOP refuses to address this because their base hates immigrants however their big business pals want cheap, captive labor. The facts, I believe, are this President has deported more people than any other and closed the borders however there are 11 million illegal immigrants in the country. It is impossible to round them up so congress must solve this problem.
2
Those who complain about undocumented immigrants deny our own personal histories and forget the words at the entrance to the grand social experiment known as the United States of America. The sign at the Statue of Liberty reads: "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door."
A welcoming of immigrants to our "melting pot" is what makes America exceptional, and why we cannot simply turn our backs on those who arrive, by whatever means, to join us in this experiment in Democracy. Our ancestors trespassed on Native American land to form what is still considered a young country by much of the rest of the world. Our ancestors violated the laws of those who were already here, and yet, we are here. Why would we be so quick to shun new generations of hard-working people who believe so deeply in the promise of this country?
A welcoming of immigrants to our "melting pot" is what makes America exceptional, and why we cannot simply turn our backs on those who arrive, by whatever means, to join us in this experiment in Democracy. Our ancestors trespassed on Native American land to form what is still considered a young country by much of the rest of the world. Our ancestors violated the laws of those who were already here, and yet, we are here. Why would we be so quick to shun new generations of hard-working people who believe so deeply in the promise of this country?
2
Why can the NY Times NOY recognize and acknowledge that so many, many Americans, both Democrats and Republicans,
are against illegal immigration and against giving so many
benefits to illegals? Why has the NYT become not much
different from MSNBC and FOX news? One half of its
"news" articles are either openly pro-Hillary or can you believe that Donald Trump??
....same as MSM. The other half of the articles are
the ones which ask us to feel sorry for bombers, or
poor illegals - stories declaring heartbreaking news.
Where is the old paper: Once there was true economic
coverage which was educating of the public. Once there
was foreign policy coverage that was in depth. (Krugman is now a political pundit; forget economics. The editorialists are usually asking us to to care for people as though we were in church. It is a loss and disappointing to see the decline of what used to be such a good newspaper.
vapid
are against illegal immigration and against giving so many
benefits to illegals? Why has the NYT become not much
different from MSNBC and FOX news? One half of its
"news" articles are either openly pro-Hillary or can you believe that Donald Trump??
....same as MSM. The other half of the articles are
the ones which ask us to feel sorry for bombers, or
poor illegals - stories declaring heartbreaking news.
Where is the old paper: Once there was true economic
coverage which was educating of the public. Once there
was foreign policy coverage that was in depth. (Krugman is now a political pundit; forget economics. The editorialists are usually asking us to to care for people as though we were in church. It is a loss and disappointing to see the decline of what used to be such a good newspaper.
vapid
9
I see many comments, including Pres. Obama's, about a "ruling" and a "decision." The news appears to be, however, that the U.S. Supreme Court was unable to reach a decision or to make a ruling. There's no indication in the reports that the Court has issued a ruling either in writing or orally.
While the President clearly needs to handle immigration issues under the incomplete and contradictory laws and appropriations made by the Congress, and the Congress arguably needs to put in place revised immigration laws, the U.S. Supreme Court clearly needs to deal, not with immigration, but with this case's specious arguments about standing and about Executive initiative in coping with the absence of a coherent legal framework on immigration.
The President is doing the Executive's job appropriately given the state of the laws -- contrary to the comments of many well-intentioned readers who don't appear to understand the situation that the Executive confronts.
But the Congress and now the U.S. Supreme Court are both falling down on their jobs. I blame the partisanship of the the Republican Party representatives in both these bodies for their failures, to say nothing of the decisions of the U.S. District and Appeals Courts, which seem more rebellious than judicious.
While the President clearly needs to handle immigration issues under the incomplete and contradictory laws and appropriations made by the Congress, and the Congress arguably needs to put in place revised immigration laws, the U.S. Supreme Court clearly needs to deal, not with immigration, but with this case's specious arguments about standing and about Executive initiative in coping with the absence of a coherent legal framework on immigration.
The President is doing the Executive's job appropriately given the state of the laws -- contrary to the comments of many well-intentioned readers who don't appear to understand the situation that the Executive confronts.
But the Congress and now the U.S. Supreme Court are both falling down on their jobs. I blame the partisanship of the the Republican Party representatives in both these bodies for their failures, to say nothing of the decisions of the U.S. District and Appeals Courts, which seem more rebellious than judicious.
1
Republicans: why we continue to pay their salaries?
1
The anti-immigrant commentators are cut from the same cloth as those "great" americans that used and abused immigrant labor to build the railroads and work the fields of our past....practically as slaves. Exploit and discard immigrants then repeat. Use for political theater as much as possible.
Most of you are the lucky benefactors of immigration laws that benefited white europeans. Face it and know that they were unfair just like the rules we have today.
Is that what you want your country to be about? Or do you want to hire people to do a job and give them respect as human beings? If it was your child how would you want to them to be treated?
Most of you are the lucky benefactors of immigration laws that benefited white europeans. Face it and know that they were unfair just like the rules we have today.
Is that what you want your country to be about? Or do you want to hire people to do a job and give them respect as human beings? If it was your child how would you want to them to be treated?
1
Where are our family values and humanity when we spend enormous effort and resources to separate law-abiding family members of American citizens and lawful residents? Why did our legislative branch fail to legislate laws to uphold family values and humanity that we try to preach around the world? Why do we, as a nation, refuse to follow the examples of the humane citizenry of these lands who welcomed and assisted the uninvited (aka illegal) aliens from the Mayflower in 1620 so that some would survive, multiply, and prosper in today United States of America? Where are our principles? What are our priorities?
1
Good result.
Could have been better with Scalia there.
But best under the circumstances.
Americans do not want amnesty.
DAPA, like DACA, is tantamount to amnesty.
The only difference being that a different President can reverse it.
DAPA would have granted the real prize: legal status, even if theoretically temporary, it would have been renewed indefinitely.
Americans need to pay attention this coming November,
and vote for candidates for President, and for Congress,
won will enact and enforce comprehensive immigration control,
not amnesty whatever its thin disguise,
and who will appoint and confirm Justices to the Supreme Court who will not create loopholes.
Could have been better with Scalia there.
But best under the circumstances.
Americans do not want amnesty.
DAPA, like DACA, is tantamount to amnesty.
The only difference being that a different President can reverse it.
DAPA would have granted the real prize: legal status, even if theoretically temporary, it would have been renewed indefinitely.
Americans need to pay attention this coming November,
and vote for candidates for President, and for Congress,
won will enact and enforce comprehensive immigration control,
not amnesty whatever its thin disguise,
and who will appoint and confirm Justices to the Supreme Court who will not create loopholes.
6
On immigration issues it's astounding how out of touch the editorial board is. It's why they can't understand Trump, or the BREXIT. Even most liberals don't want illegal immigration - evidenced by the comments in a papers who are usually extremely left leaning
8
The constitutional consequences of a decision for the administration would have been awful. There's always a temptation to want a President one agrees with to have imperial powers, but that's not (thank goodness) the Constitution we have. Obama had no constitutional right to confer legal status on immigrants here illegally. I am an immigrant who volunteered for, and voted for, Obama in 2008, but i opposed his action on principle. What is frightening is that 4 Supreme Court justices voted for an imperial presidency.
8
Why does Stu Freeman get to comment 50 times or more on the same article? Responding to everyone he disagrees with. We got it the first time.
6
It is simple.
The legislative branch makes the laws, the executive branch enforces the laws and the judicial branch ensures that relationship stays in tact.
This is not complicated. The president's oath of office makes him swear to uphold the Constitution. The Constitution dictates that the President shall "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". The President does not have the right to only faithfully execute the laws he agrees with.
It is ridiculous that 4 justices voted for Obama on this one. Their job is to ensure the Constitution is upheld. There is no gray area here. Obama ignored the Constitution.
But, he is not alone. All our leaders are collectively ignoring the Constitution and we are letting them. The legislative branch continues to renew the Patriot Act/Freedom Act in its various forms despite the fact it shreds the Bill of Rights, our President ignores the laws that the Legislative branch passes when he deems fit and our Judicial branch has become a political animal that ignores all understanding of the written language they are suppose to interpret and simply votes along party lines.
And if the system wasn't broken enough.... now the choice forced upon us for the next President is Hillary vs Donald?
Wake up people. The entire system is horrendously broken and we are all simply choosing a side and rooting for the team we like. We need to force our representatives to start obeying one of the greatest societal rule books ever compiled.
The legislative branch makes the laws, the executive branch enforces the laws and the judicial branch ensures that relationship stays in tact.
This is not complicated. The president's oath of office makes him swear to uphold the Constitution. The Constitution dictates that the President shall "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". The President does not have the right to only faithfully execute the laws he agrees with.
It is ridiculous that 4 justices voted for Obama on this one. Their job is to ensure the Constitution is upheld. There is no gray area here. Obama ignored the Constitution.
But, he is not alone. All our leaders are collectively ignoring the Constitution and we are letting them. The legislative branch continues to renew the Patriot Act/Freedom Act in its various forms despite the fact it shreds the Bill of Rights, our President ignores the laws that the Legislative branch passes when he deems fit and our Judicial branch has become a political animal that ignores all understanding of the written language they are suppose to interpret and simply votes along party lines.
And if the system wasn't broken enough.... now the choice forced upon us for the next President is Hillary vs Donald?
Wake up people. The entire system is horrendously broken and we are all simply choosing a side and rooting for the team we like. We need to force our representatives to start obeying one of the greatest societal rule books ever compiled.
7
The human costs of this decision are truly tragic. The US is no longer America. Today the UK left Europe and the US left the Americas.
The only heartbreak is that Justice Scalia could not cast the deciding vote to throw Obama's lawless executive actions rewarding violators of US immigration laws in the garbage can. For the 4 - 5 million illegal aliens don't worry your entire family including anchor babies will be deported keeping family unity.
And to the Central Americans now planning on coming to the US do yourself a favor and stay home. America wants LEGAL immigrants and not economic opportunists who disregard US laws.
And to the Central Americans now planning on coming to the US do yourself a favor and stay home. America wants LEGAL immigrants and not economic opportunists who disregard US laws.
9
The Dreamers had nothing to do with their situation. They were brought to this country as babies and children, and grew up here. Many do not speak any other language, and are as American as any other children and young people. Now their positions are precarious. There are undocumented young people serving in the U.S. military, and many of the undocumented immigrants have been here for years, contributing to taxes and doing work others are not willing to do. Now they have to retreat more deeply to shadows, and young people have to fear their families will be torn apart with children left behind.
The nativists and bigots seem to be winning. They get to have as many guns and as much ammo as they like, control women's bodies, and treat immigrants like dirt. Trump plans to turn away all immigrants due to a religious test, as well as spy on American mosques. He wants to build a wall at Mexico's expense which of course won't happen, and to round up and detain some 11 million men, women, and children, which would be an atrocity and crime against humanity. There is a reason almost every major church has supported the immigrants. These are a matter of conscience, and the majority of Americans favor legal ways to citizenship. No hearts, no souls, and cruelty on the part of the Republicans who are enjoying yet another extended vacation at taxpayer expense.
Anyone who cares about American values had better be out there voting for Hillary next November.
The nativists and bigots seem to be winning. They get to have as many guns and as much ammo as they like, control women's bodies, and treat immigrants like dirt. Trump plans to turn away all immigrants due to a religious test, as well as spy on American mosques. He wants to build a wall at Mexico's expense which of course won't happen, and to round up and detain some 11 million men, women, and children, which would be an atrocity and crime against humanity. There is a reason almost every major church has supported the immigrants. These are a matter of conscience, and the majority of Americans favor legal ways to citizenship. No hearts, no souls, and cruelty on the part of the Republicans who are enjoying yet another extended vacation at taxpayer expense.
Anyone who cares about American values had better be out there voting for Hillary next November.
2
I'm the son of an immigrant. I'm in favor of a path to citizenship for long-term illegal immigrants who have jobs, pay taxes, and have no criminal record beyond having broken our nation's immigration law years ago.
I'm also a strong supporter of our Constitution. I'm disappointed that our president favored political confrontation over political compromise. I'm disappointed that he thought his pen was mightier than that of our Founding Fathers. I'm disappointed that a man with a Harvard law degree broke faith with the document he swore to uphold and defend.
Congress writes laws. Presidents uphold them. We seem to have lost that thread these past few years. I thank the Supreme Court for its decision.
I'm also a strong supporter of our Constitution. I'm disappointed that our president favored political confrontation over political compromise. I'm disappointed that he thought his pen was mightier than that of our Founding Fathers. I'm disappointed that a man with a Harvard law degree broke faith with the document he swore to uphold and defend.
Congress writes laws. Presidents uphold them. We seem to have lost that thread these past few years. I thank the Supreme Court for its decision.
8
I just don’t get it! Even St. Reagan granted amnesty to over a million immigrants--flat out citizenship.
We are a NATION OF IMMIGRANTS! We have a patchwork set of laws for immigrants to attempt to follow. Since the 1600s these laws have been “exclusionary laws.” Whomever we happened to hate at the time....From the later 1800s to early to mid 1900s, laws were passed that picked and chose.
No Chinese allowed! No Irish. Anyone with a disease were sent right back--tuberculosis stopped a lot of people from coming in. A law was passed in the early 1900s that EVERY immigrant MUST be able to read and write fluent English! The “crippled” and mentally defective were stopped.
E pluribus unum. Out of many-one. We had hybrid vigor, new blood, new cultures, new ideas. It is shown over and over that it’s the immigrants seeking out a new land with the best ideas. Immigrants reached our shores then immediately turned around and said “All filled up! No more!”
I tire of comments that “My grandparents came over from (fill in the blank--Russia, Italy, Germany and THEY did it the “right way!” Untrue. They snuck in over the Canadian border down into the midwest--German, Polish farmers and rail workers. Both of my grandparents moved from Scotland or from Bohemia (now Bavaria and the Czech republic).
DACA--the Dreamers brought here as small children,now protected by Obama. They paid $500 and stood in lines all day. DAPA--protects the parents of children born here!
NOT amnesty!
We are a NATION OF IMMIGRANTS! We have a patchwork set of laws for immigrants to attempt to follow. Since the 1600s these laws have been “exclusionary laws.” Whomever we happened to hate at the time....From the later 1800s to early to mid 1900s, laws were passed that picked and chose.
No Chinese allowed! No Irish. Anyone with a disease were sent right back--tuberculosis stopped a lot of people from coming in. A law was passed in the early 1900s that EVERY immigrant MUST be able to read and write fluent English! The “crippled” and mentally defective were stopped.
E pluribus unum. Out of many-one. We had hybrid vigor, new blood, new cultures, new ideas. It is shown over and over that it’s the immigrants seeking out a new land with the best ideas. Immigrants reached our shores then immediately turned around and said “All filled up! No more!”
I tire of comments that “My grandparents came over from (fill in the blank--Russia, Italy, Germany and THEY did it the “right way!” Untrue. They snuck in over the Canadian border down into the midwest--German, Polish farmers and rail workers. Both of my grandparents moved from Scotland or from Bohemia (now Bavaria and the Czech republic).
DACA--the Dreamers brought here as small children,now protected by Obama. They paid $500 and stood in lines all day. DAPA--protects the parents of children born here!
NOT amnesty!
2
I am struck, first by the following: "absolute refusal by congressional Republicans to reform an unjust system". Explain, please, in simple words, what is unjust about deporting those who broke the law to enter this country.
Then again: Repeatedly referring to the population at risk of deportation as "immigrants." The term "immigrant" is defined in law. They are not immigrants; they are "illegal aliens", a term also defined in law.
Republicans didn't "concoct" the accusation that Mr. Obama abused his powers. They merely stated a fact. Part of the Executive Office's duties is to enforce the laws -- all of them. Using executive fiat to negate that duty is, in reality and not concoction, an abuse of the office's power.
Many of us who are on the left on other issues are in agreement with the Republican position here. Just look at the most popular comments submitted in response to another essay in today’s paper: “My Undocumented Mom, America’s Housekeeper”.
What we want, very simply, is that the laws and regulations governing immigration be enforced.
Incidentally: I myself immigrated to the United States half a century ago – legally – and have been a proud citizen for over half my life.
Then again: Repeatedly referring to the population at risk of deportation as "immigrants." The term "immigrant" is defined in law. They are not immigrants; they are "illegal aliens", a term also defined in law.
Republicans didn't "concoct" the accusation that Mr. Obama abused his powers. They merely stated a fact. Part of the Executive Office's duties is to enforce the laws -- all of them. Using executive fiat to negate that duty is, in reality and not concoction, an abuse of the office's power.
Many of us who are on the left on other issues are in agreement with the Republican position here. Just look at the most popular comments submitted in response to another essay in today’s paper: “My Undocumented Mom, America’s Housekeeper”.
What we want, very simply, is that the laws and regulations governing immigration be enforced.
Incidentally: I myself immigrated to the United States half a century ago – legally – and have been a proud citizen for over half my life.
14
Imperialism doesn't work Mr Obama. Neither does the passing of Obamacae since it was passed under a lie told by you to the aamerican people. Maybe you would resign early and do us all a favor. With all respect of course
10
Pres. Obama: "It is heartbreaking for the millions of immigrants who have made their lives here."[1]
What is heartbreaking is the president omitting the word "illegal" in this political rhetoric.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us/supreme-court-immigration-obama-dap...
What is heartbreaking is the president omitting the word "illegal" in this political rhetoric.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us/supreme-court-immigration-obama-dap...
13
Your headline is disingenuous.
We are talking about ILLEGAL immigration.
We are talking about ILLEGAL immigration.
13
More madness from the GOP court.
Vote accordingly.
Vote accordingly.
3
well illegal immigrants shouldnt be mad at Obama, he did most things he could have given the SCOTUS debacle. maybe now he wishes he would have done a recess appointment like I and others suggested right off the bat and defied the repubs on the issue. but he didnt. no guts, no glory.
and as you just saw with brexit, people are sick of too much immigration. this is the tip of the iceberg deal with it. it means Merkle is gone and hopefully it means Greece gives EU the finger like they should have done before enduring the idiotic "austerity" ie, econ destruction so they can recover sometime before 2030.
so here's the quid pro quo; no deportation of 11 million as numbskull trump suggests in return for no more anchor babies. period. I dare you to write your next editorial on this subject and list the countries that dont allow anchor babies vs ones who do and let the readers see which list of countries (esp all the "liberal" european countries on the no anchor side) they'd rather be in bed. go ahead, I dare you....
and as you just saw with brexit, people are sick of too much immigration. this is the tip of the iceberg deal with it. it means Merkle is gone and hopefully it means Greece gives EU the finger like they should have done before enduring the idiotic "austerity" ie, econ destruction so they can recover sometime before 2030.
so here's the quid pro quo; no deportation of 11 million as numbskull trump suggests in return for no more anchor babies. period. I dare you to write your next editorial on this subject and list the countries that dont allow anchor babies vs ones who do and let the readers see which list of countries (esp all the "liberal" european countries on the no anchor side) they'd rather be in bed. go ahead, I dare you....
7
Impasse yes, heartbreak no. There is nothing immoral or outrageous about an orderly immigration system designed to benefit and improve the lives and environmental surroundings of native citizens.
32
You mean Native American Indians?
1
About time this nutty insane policy of allowing anyone to disregard rules and then playing some sort of rights game. The Obama the "Dictator " got burned GOOD.
23
So you would deport the parents of children born here. And what do you propose to do with a million or so orphans? How about internment camps? Or put them to work in sweatshops? Typically, the right wing nutjobs have no answers.
2
Oh please!
"And so four million to five million people who might have been spared deportation remain stranded, vulnerable to arrest and unable to work legally."
Back to real life, for just a moment?
Nobody's going to be deported that wasn't already going to be deported. We just aren't going to issue driver's licenses, work permits, and other benefits to illegal immigrants.
Just as every other country.
"And so four million to five million people who might have been spared deportation remain stranded, vulnerable to arrest and unable to work legally."
Back to real life, for just a moment?
Nobody's going to be deported that wasn't already going to be deported. We just aren't going to issue driver's licenses, work permits, and other benefits to illegal immigrants.
Just as every other country.
23
Right. And the people that came to America thru the right channels are fine. The issue is follow the process. Obama is more upset that he will not make history books on this issue. He upset for himself.
The UK was facing the same issues and now that all stops with the LEAVE decision. So Obama's immigrants will be fine/down the road they will have to go thru the proper registration process and learning and they become citizens. It will help expand our armed forces and our tax base.
But America will do it - not Obama.
T
The UK was facing the same issues and now that all stops with the LEAVE decision. So Obama's immigrants will be fine/down the road they will have to go thru the proper registration process and learning and they become citizens. It will help expand our armed forces and our tax base.
But America will do it - not Obama.
T
Finally. A ruling on immigration that called out Pres. Obama's unconstitutional moves to make policy and law.
Illegal actually means illegal, again. At least one thing is right in the US.
Illegal actually means illegal, again. At least one thing is right in the US.
19
Why is that federal law enforcement - ICE, Homeland Security, the FBI, the Justice Dept. start enforcing the laws against the corporations and individuals who hire illegal immigrants? The construction industry used to be filled with good-paying jobs - and illegal immigrants were used to undercut wages and bust unions. If these laws were enforced, you'd see immigration reform quickly get through Congress. This entire issue brings to light that once again, corporations are not held legally accountable, and no, a fine that is just the cost of doing business is not enough. How many states still don't use E-Verify? Some very powerful interests benefit from illegal immigration at the expense of everyone. And the media needs to investigate and name names - who's hiring all these illegal immigrants? Why are the laws not enforced against the employers?
53
How can this be heartbreaking. Was there any doubt it was going to be a 4 to 4 split.
7
DARPA is horrible legislation that Obama should not have proposed. The legislation basically states that all you need to do to get permission to break our immigration laws is birth an anchor baby on our soil. Why should any foreign national have that kind of power in our society?
26
DACA. DARPA creates robots for the military. Just FYI
1
As usual, completely out of touch. If the board would only read the comments on the related news report, they wouldn't write this. 4-4 is actually slam-dunk packaged respectfully.
Here is what strong coffee, a much-needed beverage noticeably absent from NYT opinions, would have revealed. The Obama Presidency is effectively over and the Trump one almost ready to board. Given that the President is now a liability, not just to his office, but also to HRC, he should resign immediately. There's absolutely no way an association with him will do anything to HRC's campaign but lose voters. The question now is how that disassociation will come about. Resignation is the only way: greater good for the party, HRC, Joe Biden, the country etc. If Obama won't resign, HRC's presidential aspirations are toast. Whether she ignores him, touts his endorsement, or even takes bold moves distancing herself, they'll all have the same effect: lose her votes by the bucketful.
This is a sad, tragic, painful and in many ways undeserving unfolding, in public, of a good man, a great man. The sooner the curtains are drawn, the lights switched off, the better. Do it Barack, just do it.
Here is what strong coffee, a much-needed beverage noticeably absent from NYT opinions, would have revealed. The Obama Presidency is effectively over and the Trump one almost ready to board. Given that the President is now a liability, not just to his office, but also to HRC, he should resign immediately. There's absolutely no way an association with him will do anything to HRC's campaign but lose voters. The question now is how that disassociation will come about. Resignation is the only way: greater good for the party, HRC, Joe Biden, the country etc. If Obama won't resign, HRC's presidential aspirations are toast. Whether she ignores him, touts his endorsement, or even takes bold moves distancing herself, they'll all have the same effect: lose her votes by the bucketful.
This is a sad, tragic, painful and in many ways undeserving unfolding, in public, of a good man, a great man. The sooner the curtains are drawn, the lights switched off, the better. Do it Barack, just do it.
10
TMK, you need to check the polls. Obama's approval rating is at 53% and climbing. Seven of 10 Americans have a negative view of Donald Trump. Do the math. I wouldn't buy my tickets for a Trump Inaugural Ball just yet.
1
"Mr. Obama’s 2014 executive actions were supposed to be a big part of his immigration legacy"
Exactly. A "legacy" built on executive actions that have the force of law and the permanence of a sandcastle. Has he actually accomplished anything of significance other than Obamacare?
Bueller? Bueller? Anyone? Anyone?
Exactly. A "legacy" built on executive actions that have the force of law and the permanence of a sandcastle. Has he actually accomplished anything of significance other than Obamacare?
Bueller? Bueller? Anyone? Anyone?
13
Odd that when President Obama exposes the common-sense prosecutorial discretion decisions to postpone deportation that are made every day by the immigration officials and makes them public and reliable, the right says he is "dictating" unconstitutional policy.
But when Ronald Reagan granted full amnesty for countless undocumented immigrants in exactly the same situation and gave them full CITIZENSHIP for nothing, he was a great conservative leader.
But when Ronald Reagan granted full amnesty for countless undocumented immigrants in exactly the same situation and gave them full CITIZENSHIP for nothing, he was a great conservative leader.
40
Um, Reagan went through congress? Can you spot the difference?
2
While I strongly disagree with the court's decision, Reagan did promise that his would be the one and only amnesty, followed by strict border enforcement. That's what made it palatable to many.
Al - No, the Right at the time thought that President Reagan made a mistake, a very large mistake by believing in the integrity of the Left when they said "one time only" and that they, the Left, was ready to enforce the rule of law on the border. They lied then and are still lying. You can't change history to fit your agenda.
1
The President of the United States invested an enormous amount of time, energy, and political capital on an effort that multiple levels of our judicial system have concluded was unconstitutional. That effort exacerbated bitter divisions among the American people and undermined progress on other issues that could have benefited them. And all of it was on behalf of foreigners (despite tortured claims that it was somehow in the national interest), foreigners who had broken laws that the American people had established through the workings of their democracy. And the New York Times has the gall to claim that the rejection of this effort is an "injustice".
29
Obama willfully, knowingly, and gleefully (I've got a pen!) broke the law - impeachment should be considered.
1
The Supreme Court has not decided the President's executive action was unconstitutional. It has decided that the District Court's injunction must remain in place until the District Court has reached a decision on the original complaint.
Due to Obama's lack of leadership and arrogance he doesn't know how to do anything except sit in the oval office and sign executive orders. At least with Bernie Sanders we would have someone who knows how to fight what is right.
13
George W. Bush signed more executive orders than Obama has. In fact, one must go back to Grover Cleveland's first presidency to find a president who initiated less executive orders that Obama. He has issued fewer executive orders than any president in the last 130 years.
1
Contrary to the assertion in this editorial, this proves the justice system does work. We don't have an Imperial President, we have 3 equal branches of government and a series of checks and balances. We have legitimate laws that were passed by our legislative bodies. We have a President who feels like he has the right to not enforce those laws. We have an action brought in Court, just as the system prescribes. This issue has been litigated through the entire judicial system. The Court of Appeals made a ruling and the SCOTUS failed to overturn that ruling, thereby affirming it. That's how the system is supposed to work. Conjecture that Merrick Garland would have voted to overturn just underscores how politicized the Court has become: he's an Obama appointee, so he better remember who buttered his bread. Sadly, we generally know which way each Justice is going to vote, based on politics and not facts. This editorial endorses more of that behavior, not less...
16
Executive action is not the way to set policy, on immigration or anything else. If Obama is unable to get Congress to pass his immigration plan he has two options:
1) find a compromise with Congress, or
2) take his argument to the American people and make it an election issue
There is no option 3 that reads: "ignore the Constitution and do what I want anyway".
The sad news in this 4-4 decision is that four Supreme Court justices apparently think there is an third option, regardless of what the Constitution says. Justice based on outcomes not process is no justice at all.
1) find a compromise with Congress, or
2) take his argument to the American people and make it an election issue
There is no option 3 that reads: "ignore the Constitution and do what I want anyway".
The sad news in this 4-4 decision is that four Supreme Court justices apparently think there is an third option, regardless of what the Constitution says. Justice based on outcomes not process is no justice at all.
21
Proud Americans from wealthy business leaders and politicians to everyday citizens discriminate and denigrate the very people who pick their food and clean their toilets, or mow their lawns as if they were God's chosen Angels.
Americans should be ashamed of themselves for their arrogant behavior towards their fellow people, who unlike them are more deserving of living here because they are in fact, real native Americans, mostly from Mexico and Central America.
All you bigots should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves for your bigotry.
When the food shelves are bare because the immigrants weren't there to pick the crops, you will get your just desserts.
I sincerely hope there is a Hispanic backlash at the Polls that ejects the bigots from Congress and installs the true Compassionate people, the Liberals, in their place.
I am really fed up with this heartless deadly Congress. I will most assuredly be voting in November, rain or shine.
Americans should be ashamed of themselves for their arrogant behavior towards their fellow people, who unlike them are more deserving of living here because they are in fact, real native Americans, mostly from Mexico and Central America.
All you bigots should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves for your bigotry.
When the food shelves are bare because the immigrants weren't there to pick the crops, you will get your just desserts.
I sincerely hope there is a Hispanic backlash at the Polls that ejects the bigots from Congress and installs the true Compassionate people, the Liberals, in their place.
I am really fed up with this heartless deadly Congress. I will most assuredly be voting in November, rain or shine.
22
Massive heartbreak for who? Millions of largely unskilled Latinos who don't belong here and have no business attempting to dictate how our nation is run? I'm a diehard Dem but oh lord do I not agree with the party on this one. Racist Latino identity politics are the least appealing thing in the world. Our immigration policies need to serve our nation's interests, not the selfish demands of foreign nationals.
These people are not stranded. No one is preventing them from going home. The last thing they have the right to demand is access to our labor force, let alone the right to stay here.
These people are not stranded. No one is preventing them from going home. The last thing they have the right to demand is access to our labor force, let alone the right to stay here.
35
Did your ancestors come to America on the Mayflower? If not, you have no right to this comment. Maybe the laws were different when your ancestors came here, but the point is that they came here in search of a better life -- just like those who have been victimized by Republican intransigence and racism.
1
High immigration levels and cheap labor ARE in the nation's interest and protectionist policies, be they to benefit goods, crops or labor are always wrong in a capitalist economy.
"Amid the tears and hugs was a firm resolve to keep on fighting, the only option in the face of injustice."
The injustice of breaking our laws and expecting amnesty? Illegals should be happy we are still at an "impasse". Under a different President they would be packing their bags.
The injustice of breaking our laws and expecting amnesty? Illegals should be happy we are still at an "impasse". Under a different President they would be packing their bags.
22
Why is it so hard for the NYT's editorial board to accept that we are a nation governed by laws? Being a liberal newspaper, you should understand and respect the view of the American public(made up of black, white,and latino voters) and the laws they choose to enact. Illegal is illegal, or have you forgotten? And stop already with the fake empathy. If you really cared, you'd feel bad for all the legal immigrants, you know,... those people who respect the law.
66
Fifty years ago, we called our nation, "The Land Of Freedom".
Now we call ourselves, "The Land Of Laws".
Now we call ourselves, "The Land Of Laws".
Seems liberals are all for laws they agree with. Other laws not so much.
1
In my PA county the Greater Reading Immigration Project (GRIP) is providing financial support so that undocumented high school graduates can attend the local community college or with significant scholarship aid one of the area colleges. It is difficult to imagine living with their constant fear of either they or parents being deported. It is a joy to hear as they express their appreciation for the community's support to receive a post-high school education. These are all students who have done well in school and would make the nation proud as future contributors to the nation.
Whether it is war(s) in the Middle East or immigrants here at home Congress has failed in its duty to enact legislation that responds to major issues facing our country. Blaming the president for failing to negotiate with a recalcitrant Congress or overstepping his powers to handle major issues facing America is scapegoating the wrong person. Congress has shirked its responsibilities far too long.
Whether it is war(s) in the Middle East or immigrants here at home Congress has failed in its duty to enact legislation that responds to major issues facing our country. Blaming the president for failing to negotiate with a recalcitrant Congress or overstepping his powers to handle major issues facing America is scapegoating the wrong person. Congress has shirked its responsibilities far too long.
17
Please do not dare mention how "deserving" of a college education the children of illegal immigrants are when millions of American citizens' children are burdened with tuition debt and can only get jobs that barely pay enough to rent an apartment and make their federal loan payments. Where is the "community support" for all those deserving students who "have done well in high school and would make the nation proud as future contributors," both of my own children among them. Both were honor high school graduates with a lot of community service and extracurricular activities on their applications. What did they get for it? Federal loans that they and we are repaying with interest and will be for years to come.
3
Consider that if Scalia were alive it would have been a 5-4 vote against the President.
15
The NYT will not be happy until the United States not only dismantles all forms of border control, but actually flies illegal aliens into this country in first class. This paper has gone off the deep end. The NYT would be wise to read the consistent reader reactions to its open borders obsession- even its liberal readership thoroughly rejects open borders and wants our immigration laws enforced. It doesn't make us racists, it makes us respectful of the rule of law.
30
If congress wants all undocumented persons deported they should fund it, which they have not. Without the funds necessary to deport 11 million, President Obama's decisions and executive orders to deport troublemakers first seems to me as a reasonable and humane answer to the issue. To start deporting indiscriminately, deporting parents from citizens born here, for example, then quit when the money runs out is unnecessarily cruel. Congress, if you want 11 million out, put your money where your mouth is.
41
I constantly read these editorials and, overwhelmingly, this is the one issue where the Editorial Board is completely out of sync with the vast majority of it otherwise faithful adherents. It is like, at the most basic level, the Catholic Church on birth control. Does there come a time when the wise men admit that their stricture from on high is just plain wrong?
20
Wow. The rule of law actually wins one.
Don't worry liberals, this ruling will protect you from power-hungry Republican Presidents in the future. It's the beauty of the system.
So try and calm the hysterics.
Don't worry liberals, this ruling will protect you from power-hungry Republican Presidents in the future. It's the beauty of the system.
So try and calm the hysterics.
11
"Injustice" in the pursuit of the maintenance of the Constitution is NO VICE.
The Constitutional Lawyer who hates the Constitution doesn't know the definition of illegal aliens nor the word injustice as it applies to existing citizens.
The Constitutional Lawyer who hates the Constitution doesn't know the definition of illegal aliens nor the word injustice as it applies to existing citizens.
14
Constitutional republics simply have no room or allowance for autocratic demands for one-man rule, even counting for cool awesomeness, and even when the elites of the media world lay supinely in favor of such.
No nation that ignored its borders and the people crossing back and forth ever lasted long without eventual heartbreak.
Just the numbers of Americans sickened and killed by diseases brought in by Mr. Obama's advertising campaigns in Latin America should be enough to make our citizens call out for protection.
A 40-year wait before illegals could vote might help Congress consider opening up immigration, but as it is, bringing in illegals looks like just the LATEST liberal Democrat plan to cheat the vote. Again.
No nation that ignored its borders and the people crossing back and forth ever lasted long without eventual heartbreak.
Just the numbers of Americans sickened and killed by diseases brought in by Mr. Obama's advertising campaigns in Latin America should be enough to make our citizens call out for protection.
A 40-year wait before illegals could vote might help Congress consider opening up immigration, but as it is, bringing in illegals looks like just the LATEST liberal Democrat plan to cheat the vote. Again.
15
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breath free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden dome." Emma Lazarus
10
Now would be a good time for both sides on the immigration issue to compromise. Americans are reluctant to support another amnesty for illegal immigrants because they know open border advocates will work to thwart efforts to curtail future illegal immigration. Meanwhile, the argument that there are too many illegal immigrants to deport is an admission that the federal government cannot stop illegal immigration on its own. Before granting another amnesty, we should first take measures to stop future illegal immigration. First, we should enact Congressional legislation that empowers states and cities to aggressively enforce immigration law that mirror federal immigration laws. Second, we should amend or reinterpret the citizenship clause to grant birthright citizenship only to children born to U.S. parents. Third, we should automatically deny asylum to migrants who enter the country unlawfully. Asylum-seekers should apply for asylum at U.S. embassies in their home countries or at legal ports of entry. Once these measures are in place, we should grant citizenship to illegal immigrants enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and grant permanent legal resident status to their family members and other illegal immigrants who have established households in the United States.
4
The Supreme Court vote doesn't leave millions of undocumented immigrants in limbo. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1996, is still in effect. This act calls for the deportation of unauthorized immigrants and a crackdown on employers who hire them. President Obama decision not to enforce the law leaves unauthorized immigrants in limbo.
20
President Obama's administration has deported more people than any president in memory. How is that disobeying the law? If the Congress/House would like even more people deported, they must appropriate the funds with which to do it.
What I find heartbreaking is that the handful of opinionated journalists who make up the Times Editorial Board should have such an outsized influence on this issue.
As for the illegal immigrants, most of them knew full well that what they were doing was illegal, and that if they came to the United States they would have to live in the shadows. And you know what, they were OK with that! They came anyway! So I don't see what the problem is with letting them continue to live in the shadows that they, after all, chose for themselves.
As for the illegal immigrants, most of them knew full well that what they were doing was illegal, and that if they came to the United States they would have to live in the shadows. And you know what, they were OK with that! They came anyway! So I don't see what the problem is with letting them continue to live in the shadows that they, after all, chose for themselves.
13
There's that dour faced Obama we've become so accustomed to. He looks so disappointed in us, yet again. All he ever does is point out our flaws, denigrate us as retrograde and lecture us about "who we are". Look buddy - what ever you are, that ain't me. It's barely even American.
But let's be honest here, for just a moment, please. This entire exercise is little more than a voter drive for Democratic Socialists. Having been prevented from achieving their Progressive Paradise by an electorate that was perceived as too white and too conservative, progressives have set about a long term project to change the demographics of the country. They speak gleefully about white people dying out and the "coalition of the ascendant" replacing them. If someone is ascending, doesn't that imply that someone else is relatively descending? Who do you think that is?
And let's face it - if these were a bunch of Republicans -in-waiting showing up at our borders, all of a sudden Obama and the NYT would be touting the rule of law instead of seeking ways to undermine it.
But let's be honest here, for just a moment, please. This entire exercise is little more than a voter drive for Democratic Socialists. Having been prevented from achieving their Progressive Paradise by an electorate that was perceived as too white and too conservative, progressives have set about a long term project to change the demographics of the country. They speak gleefully about white people dying out and the "coalition of the ascendant" replacing them. If someone is ascending, doesn't that imply that someone else is relatively descending? Who do you think that is?
And let's face it - if these were a bunch of Republicans -in-waiting showing up at our borders, all of a sudden Obama and the NYT would be touting the rule of law instead of seeking ways to undermine it.
26
As the son of an immigrant in a nation that has been made great by immigrants, it is more than "maddening" to see the heartlessness of self-congratulatory inaction on dealing with millions of undocumented immigrants (for all I know my grandfather may also have been undocumented) by Republicans who seem more interested in scoring vacuous political points against President Obama than actually doing anything to resolve the immigration problem. Instead, we have the race-baiting rhetoric of their nominee with the support of House Speaker Paul Ryan libeling an entire ethnic group as "rapists" and "criminals" with the threat of "Deport 'Em All" and building a wall along the border to keep them out. This is not how to "Make America Great Again," but a regression to a mean-spirited time rife with the eugenics of white racial superiority, manifest destiny, and state-sponsored terror to minorities. The Supreme Court is just one vote away from changing this, but first we must all vote this November.
7
The issue before the court was not immigration but President Obama's abuse of power in ignoring a Congress with which he disagrees and taking on authority that is not his.
Judge Scalia's untimely death was a bit of good luck for the president. Otherwise, the court would have overturned his abuse of power rather than a 4-4 tie that leaves it in limbo.
Judge Scalia's untimely death was a bit of good luck for the president. Otherwise, the court would have overturned his abuse of power rather than a 4-4 tie that leaves it in limbo.
10
The coverage of this latest decision on President Obama's executive actions on immigration hasn't seemed to point out that this does not decide the merits of actions. If I understand correctly, this is all about an injunction imposed by a district judge in Texas to block the actions.
Thus, there is no decision on the actual case, and no clear decision on the injunction. And it was all done by seven Republican appointees, four of whom were appointed by President G. W. Bush.
It is also worth noting that the district judge who started all this, Judge Andrew S. Hanen, has sounded like a looney in his latest salvos on the case. To my eye. the whole point of the injunction in the first place was political, not legal: the judge simply sought to delay an action by a president he doesn't like.
Thus, there is no decision on the actual case, and no clear decision on the injunction. And it was all done by seven Republican appointees, four of whom were appointed by President G. W. Bush.
It is also worth noting that the district judge who started all this, Judge Andrew S. Hanen, has sounded like a looney in his latest salvos on the case. To my eye. the whole point of the injunction in the first place was political, not legal: the judge simply sought to delay an action by a president he doesn't like.
6
So tired of the Upper West Side.
10
This editorial is unintentionally hilarious. Suppose a republican president complained about Dodd-Frank and demanded that Congress reform it, calling it an unjust burden on the banks. Suppose further that Congress decided that, while the president was entitled to his or her views, Congress didn't want to engage in any amendment to Dodd Frank. If the president then signed an executive order directing the SEC not to enforce it, the New York Times would, rightly, blow a gasket: The president has refused to follow the rule of law! the Times would thunder. An overreach! An abuse of presidential power!
The Times would be right, as were the district court in reaching its decision and the appellate and supreme courts in refusing to overturn the district court. We have a branch of government, Congress, with the power to make laws. The executive branch has the duty to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." Blowing off federal statutes flunks this test however you frame it.
The fact that the court arrived at its result by a 4-4 vote rather than by 5-4, or 6-3, means nothing. It merely gives opponents of the ruling something about which to complain.
The Times would be right, as were the district court in reaching its decision and the appellate and supreme courts in refusing to overturn the district court. We have a branch of government, Congress, with the power to make laws. The executive branch has the duty to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." Blowing off federal statutes flunks this test however you frame it.
The fact that the court arrived at its result by a 4-4 vote rather than by 5-4, or 6-3, means nothing. It merely gives opponents of the ruling something about which to complain.
27
With all due respect, you are incorrect in two respects. The President has limited resources to deal with an admittedly significant immigration problem and he tried to used his discretion to deal with the problem and mitigate some of the adverse effects of a system that needs reform. He has not just refused to enforce a law that he disagrees with. He clearly disagrees with the law as it is, but he deports a lot of people.
The 4-4 vote means quite a bit. No precedent is established by that vote. Judges are deferential to precedent, even when they disagree with it. It is the difference between strike one and strike three.
The 4-4 vote means quite a bit. No precedent is established by that vote. Judges are deferential to precedent, even when they disagree with it. It is the difference between strike one and strike three.
Wait a minute. This article appears to be blaming Republicans for the Supreme Court decision. How can that be? I don't think that's the way the Supreme Court is supposed to work.
8
Faced with a legislative deadlock caused by the Republican obstructionism if Obama had to resort to the presidential discretion allowed in some cases like this one on immigration, it's hardly an infringement of the legislative authority that the Congress had willingly abdicated under the Republican threats. Now it's clear beyond doubt tha even the Senate Republicans' refusal to debate and consider the Presidential nominee for the Supreme court justice, a vacancy caused by Justice Scalia's death, was a part of their game plan to obstruct justice by keeping the court divided and never allowing a decisive majority decision at the apex court.
6
Republicans are incapable of imagining themselves in the shoes of someone whose life experiences are different than theirs. This is a terrible human failing in individuals whose job it is to make laws that are supportive of everyone. Always coming down on the side of people who feel entitled to dominate is a serious psychological problem. Dominated people need friends in government to protect them from the excesses of people who prey on them -- either by cheating them on payday or scapegoating them to distract attention from the crimes of the ruling class.
19
Bill,
Canada is underpopulated. What say you open your borders to a few million immigrants?
Canada is underpopulated. What say you open your borders to a few million immigrants?
4
The job of Congress is to represent the American people,
and the job of the President is to enforce the laws of Congress.
The American people do not want amnesty, whatever its thin disguise.
The American people want much stronger immigration control.
and the job of the President is to enforce the laws of Congress.
The American people do not want amnesty, whatever its thin disguise.
The American people want much stronger immigration control.
2
There are right and wrong ways to do something. But when it comes to contentious issues, we require in our leaders the skills to forge workable compromises and to SELL them. President Obama, despite a stated desire to find common ground, failed at striking those workable compromises and failed at taking us productively forward.
The “right way” does NOT consist of dictating policy preferences that a president fails to sell, to Congress OR to America. Along that path lies eventual tyranny, and that principle is what this Court non-ruling validates.
The next president will have a solid basis for crafting workable compromises with Congress on immigration. Paul Ryan says of this issue: “Reforming our immigration system will help strengthen America in several important ways … They [immigrants] started twenty-five percent of all new businesses in 2011. And immigrant-owned small businesses employ 4.7 million people. In fact, first- or second-generation immigrants founded 40 percent of all Fortune 500 companies, including AT&T, Kraft, Google, Yahoo!, and eBay. As a result, the American Action Forum estimates that immigration reform will boost per capita income by $1,700 over 10 years and reduce the federal deficit by $2.7 trillion.”
Those aren’t the convictions of someone who doesn’t understand the importance of comprehensive immigration reform. But it will require a real leader in the Oval Office with the skills to balance interests and convictions to drive a real solution.
The “right way” does NOT consist of dictating policy preferences that a president fails to sell, to Congress OR to America. Along that path lies eventual tyranny, and that principle is what this Court non-ruling validates.
The next president will have a solid basis for crafting workable compromises with Congress on immigration. Paul Ryan says of this issue: “Reforming our immigration system will help strengthen America in several important ways … They [immigrants] started twenty-five percent of all new businesses in 2011. And immigrant-owned small businesses employ 4.7 million people. In fact, first- or second-generation immigrants founded 40 percent of all Fortune 500 companies, including AT&T, Kraft, Google, Yahoo!, and eBay. As a result, the American Action Forum estimates that immigration reform will boost per capita income by $1,700 over 10 years and reduce the federal deficit by $2.7 trillion.”
Those aren’t the convictions of someone who doesn’t understand the importance of comprehensive immigration reform. But it will require a real leader in the Oval Office with the skills to balance interests and convictions to drive a real solution.
27
By "real leader," are you referring to Paul Ryan's choice for the Oval Office (and possibly your own), Donald J. Trump, who would certainly do his darndest to forge a compromise by which all undocumented aliens who refuse to work for $5 an hour at Mar-a-Lago will be hunted down and expelled from a nation that pledged to take in the tired, hungry and poor along with those who've yearned to breathe free? I guess Mr. Obama is just not a strong enough leader to persuade those who pledged not to work with him from the outset to ignore his intelligence and his fundamental decency and do what's right and just for those of us who haven't inherited (or Trumpeted) their fortunes. Perhaps Richard has had the experience of working productively with those who'll say "white" when you point to a night-time sky but mere mortals like our incumbent President can't overcome such willful prejudice.
33
Whatever you think of the immigration issue Paul Ryan is full of horse feathers. He doesn't mean to do anything that will help humans unless his corporate sponsors tell him to do so.
2
Republicans are not interested in immigration reform. President Obama is not responsible for their failure to compromise.
1
We have millions of people living in the shadows, where they are afraid and vulnerable to exploitation by the elites of American society.
It's time that they come out of the shadows...
...returning to their own countries where they can live legally and without fear of arrest.
It's time that they come out of the shadows...
...returning to their own countries where they can live legally and without fear of arrest.
111
It is time for them to be deported. It's the law. If you do not support the rule of law, get out of my country.
11
Their families are here. Their children are born here. And many of them have Amerindian blood running through their veins. Much more American than you think.
Native Americans own this land, which we now call the US, for more than 5000 years. Only about 500 years ago (Columbus “discovered” America in 1492) non-Americans (mostly Anglos) came to America and gradually took away the land from the natives piece by piece. The majority of the so-called “Hispanics” are descendants of Native Americans who used to freely roam on today’s North America and South America. Texas annexation didn’t happen until 1845. The “Mexican Territory” used to include California, Nevada, Utah, most of Arizona, half of New Mexico, a quarter of Colorado, and a section of Wyoming. It was not until the US invasion in 1846 resulting in the U.S. annexation. The US took away the sovereignty of these territories by force, but the flow of natives returning to their ancestral land just keep on coming. What makes us think we are entitled to this land more than they are?
2
What won't Democrats give and who won't they pander to for votes? They excel at taking the incomes of 50% of Americans to fund the free cheese programs that buy the votes. So 4-5mm illegal immigrants don't get a free pass. Seems like something Congress should oversee. Thank the Founders for separation of powers.
50
Do those free cheese programs include Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? How about public schools, unemployment insurance and Veterans benefits? Subsidies for corporations like Big Oil and Sugar? Ah, now we're talking!
15
We pay directly for Social Security, medicare and unemployment insurance. If you haven't paid in you don't get the benefit. No free ride there. We pay for public schools primarily through real estate taxes. No free ride there. VA benefits are earned by serving. No free ride there. Medicaid is a free cheese program. Well, one out of six isn't too bad I guess. We do agree though that subsidies for big business (corporate welfare) should disappear.
2
Stu, Here is a wakeup call for you. Programs like Medicare and Social Security are funded by payroll deductions paid over the course
of years working in the 'on the books' economy. Why is the phrase "illegal alien" so difficult to understand? These folks broke the law when they breached our borders. They are therefore criminals who are owed nothing from the tax paying citizens of the United States.
of years working in the 'on the books' economy. Why is the phrase "illegal alien" so difficult to understand? These folks broke the law when they breached our borders. They are therefore criminals who are owed nothing from the tax paying citizens of the United States.
3
The cause of any heartache lies at the feet of the illegal aliens. All nations have laws and the illegal aliens chose not to follow our laws. It mattered little what ill effect their entry caused to Americans and legal residents.
80
When American corporations raid and plunder the natural resources of the countries that those "illegals" hail from do they get to complain about the "ill effect" our entry into their region has caused them?
12
Stu,
American Company's don't raid or plunder anything in Mexico it's against Mexican law. The plundering must be done by Rich Mexicans that's why the Poor Mexicans come to the U.S.
The largest resource company in Guatemala is Canadian not U.S.! The Guatemalans still come to the U.S. Because they can't get into Canada.
American Company's don't raid or plunder anything in Mexico it's against Mexican law. The plundering must be done by Rich Mexicans that's why the Poor Mexicans come to the U.S.
The largest resource company in Guatemala is Canadian not U.S.! The Guatemalans still come to the U.S. Because they can't get into Canada.
5
"Many more will now have to await another day, another president, another Congress." ... Or they can simply go back to their respective countries and return legally.
78
Just who is "they," kemosabe?
6
"They" are the people here illegally whose status was affected by the SCOTUS decision. That is not abundantly clear to you?
3
Illegal aliens, according to current US law, Stu. You can try to live your life as if it's the 17th century if you want. Good luck.
2
My grandparents came to this country therough Ellis Island in the early 1900's, at a time when everything was made by hand. The country needed people to make things, so the people came. The U.S. Polulation at the time was around 100 million. Fifty years later, I sat in a primary school classroom and celebrated the population milestone of 200 million people in the U.S. Wow! 200 million! Still needed people 'cause we still needed lots of able hands to farm, make textile products and cars, do filing, etc., so that was great news. Here we are 50 years later with a population of over 300 million at a time when we need fewer people to do anything, and employement, health care, and retirement are all iffy propositions. Also,been reading articles lately about social scientists and economists devisiing ways for the government to pay people for doing nothing so they will be able to survive in the near future. We're also having issues with water scarcity and the various types of waste that go along with having people live anywhere, not to mention greenhouse gas-caused global warming that affectes us all and will make if harder and harder to live on this planet. Given all that, can somebody explain the why the New York Times continues to push for open immigration...or any immigration into the United States at all for that matter? Wouldn't the forward thinking position be focused on implementing a reasonable form of population control before the golden goose is dead?
90
We need people to do the jobs that the 90 million workers, who've left the workforce in the last 7 years, are too lazy to do.
1
The New York Times serves as an unregistered lobbying entity for the hard left wing of the Democratic Party and their editorial policies and slanted reporting are blatant manifestations of that mindset.
"All the News That Is Fit to Print" has morphed into "All the News that Fits Our Political Leanings." The Times has lost much of its reputation for objective journalismm and the slanted views of Krugman, Edsell, Bruni, and Blow are faint echoes of the paper's former standards of excellence.
"All the News That Is Fit to Print" has morphed into "All the News that Fits Our Political Leanings." The Times has lost much of its reputation for objective journalismm and the slanted views of Krugman, Edsell, Bruni, and Blow are faint echoes of the paper's former standards of excellence.
1
May be this is the tipping point for multiple actions. Yes, the affected people must organize themselves to an effective vote bank as we call in India and vote candidates in every election from the lowest to the highest who support their cause and justice. Secondly, those fence sitters among the 'original' citizens who still value social justice, fair play, human rights and most importantly those values - stated and unstated which went to making what is today's US of A should cast their lot with these millions. The darkest hour is always before the dawn.
7
US citizens on every forum I have read are all coming out with one opinion on this. GO HOME. You are NOT AN IMMIGRANT, you are an ILLEGAL ALIEN who knew what you were doing was a crime when you came here and we never should have given your children citizenship to begin with.
When is the will of the citizens of the US going to be given any weight? Take a good read at all the forums on this topic, 95% are in favor of deportation.
When is the will of the citizens of the US going to be given any weight? Take a good read at all the forums on this topic, 95% are in favor of deportation.
9
Wow. You really think foreign nationals who broke our laws deliberately should be allowed to vote in our elections? Why on earth is the power deciding our immigration laws one that is not reserved for law abiding American citizens? The people in question should make demands -- on Latino leaders not ours!
9
No matter how one feels about immigration, this decision shows the American judicial system as a failure. A single court of nationwide jurisdiction and stature could and should in six months decide finally the question of the President’s authority. Instead, after eighteen months, three courts have been unable to decide the question, but have blocked government action. Does anyone know the local judge who asserted jurisdiction to stop action nationwide and where he sits? That is a rule of nobody! It is bad government.
4
Wish President Obama would reinforce his directive by saying "so impeach me!"
6
He swore to obey the constitution if not he should be impeached
5
What is unjust about following the law? If the editorial board would like to pay my local school tax bill, which is up 33% in the past 3 years, let me know.
120
Same thing here in New Jersey. An influx of such people has done nothing but raise our taxes and decrease the quality of life around here. For the president I voted for twice to stand up and justify their behavior is sickening.
12
Mr. President - you will leave the White House without helping those immigrants that you wanted to help. But it's not because you didn't try.
Now, thousands and thousands are in the hands of someone else.
But the words about somewhere in our backgrounds there was a group of people who did not want our entry into the country, no matter where we came from, will resound and always have deep meaning. Because that could be any one of us.
Now, thousands and thousands are in the hands of someone else.
But the words about somewhere in our backgrounds there was a group of people who did not want our entry into the country, no matter where we came from, will resound and always have deep meaning. Because that could be any one of us.
16
"Buts it's not because you didn't try", Really?? He waited too long, he had congress on his side and his popularity very Hong and did nothing.
2
This editorial fails to articulate why the lower courts placed an injunction on DAPA. The most acute Constitutional problem with DAPA is not its abuse of prosecutorial discretion. The injunction does not rely on any limitations to prosecutorial discretion. DAPA does not just say that deportation will be delayed, it grants legal rights and privileges to the aliens who are otherwise here illegally, including rights to work, social security benefits, etc. Whether you agree with the wisdom of the granting these rights and privileges or not, the President does not and should not have the authority to create an entire administrative regime to process benefits and legal privileges not legislated by Congress.
86
These are excellent points.
6
Could not agree more with this observation:
"the President does not and should not have the authority to create an entire administrative regime to process benefits and legal privileges not legislated by Congress."
And this is the main reason so many states opposed his
actions.
"the President does not and should not have the authority to create an entire administrative regime to process benefits and legal privileges not legislated by Congress."
And this is the main reason so many states opposed his
actions.
3
"DAPA ... grants legal rights and privileges to the aliens who are otherwise here illegally, including rights to work, social security benefits, etc."
Please cite a reliable source for that assertion.
Please cite a reliable source for that assertion.
This isn't about immigration or "executive over-reach" and the separation of powers. This is *all about* the Right's continuing and racially-motivated attempt to undermine public confidence in the legitimate office of an elected president whom they have characterized as an usurper, a foreign-born Marxist/Socialist, a secret plotter against American lives here and abroad, one who cherishes a desire for the subjugation of America to its enemies. The echo chamber of astonishing cacophonous ugliness hasn't been easy to tune out, especially when Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and his satellites bang the drums daily.
Immigration wasn't a problem for them when Ronald Reagan and his two Bush successors were president. But after 2008, immigration, health care, sexual identity politics, female reproductive choices, minimum wage, and other social issues suddenly became culture war topics designed to divert attention from necessary items such as power grids, road and bridge repair.
A humane, compassionate president sought to untangle that which cannot be unraveled because a lazy and bought Congress takes its orders from patriotic ALEC, Koch Industries and reactionary "think tanks." Fenced in, immigrants now trapped by an indifferent Supreme Court find themselves on a island.
There's no way out now, but out.
Immigration wasn't a problem for them when Ronald Reagan and his two Bush successors were president. But after 2008, immigration, health care, sexual identity politics, female reproductive choices, minimum wage, and other social issues suddenly became culture war topics designed to divert attention from necessary items such as power grids, road and bridge repair.
A humane, compassionate president sought to untangle that which cannot be unraveled because a lazy and bought Congress takes its orders from patriotic ALEC, Koch Industries and reactionary "think tanks." Fenced in, immigrants now trapped by an indifferent Supreme Court find themselves on a island.
There's no way out now, but out.
86
A country whose motto is e pluribus unum cannot continue to harbor its bigotry, fear, ignorance and racism especially for political reasons, without betraying itself to the world. This issue and several others are not ever going away and we'll just have to wait for the full court.
It wasn't Obama's fault. His heart was in the right place, he didn't want to separate the families. I'm angry too.
It wasn't Obama's fault. His heart was in the right place, he didn't want to separate the families. I'm angry too.
5
Face it, the Reagan amnesty was a failure in several ways. It makes no sense to cite that as a reason. Two wrongs do not make a right.
2
I'm a life-long Republican who twice voted for Barack Obama: the first time because the notion of Sarah Palin being a heartbeat from the Presidency was appalling, and the second time because he had done a sufficiently credible job in dealing with the economic mess he had inherited that he merited a second term.
But I've always had a residual unease about the fact that this constitutional law professor couldn't get the oath of office right...on two tries. And this issue is replete with failures on his part to "protect and defend" the Constitution. So he merits an "F" in this course.
There are those who comply with immigration laws and there are invaders. As a Quaker growing up in the Delaware Valley, I understand that even William Penn's laudable efforts to treat the indigenous people with respect had an inherent cultural bias. But the European invasion of four centuries ago shouldn't be used as a template or as a justification for the current situation. After all, I've yet to see a Quaker meetinghouse without a lock on the doors. And I can't help but wonder what the President's response would be if anyone who felt like it started dropping their kids off at Sidwell every school morning.
But I've always had a residual unease about the fact that this constitutional law professor couldn't get the oath of office right...on two tries. And this issue is replete with failures on his part to "protect and defend" the Constitution. So he merits an "F" in this course.
There are those who comply with immigration laws and there are invaders. As a Quaker growing up in the Delaware Valley, I understand that even William Penn's laudable efforts to treat the indigenous people with respect had an inherent cultural bias. But the European invasion of four centuries ago shouldn't be used as a template or as a justification for the current situation. After all, I've yet to see a Quaker meetinghouse without a lock on the doors. And I can't help but wonder what the President's response would be if anyone who felt like it started dropping their kids off at Sidwell every school morning.
2
It is indeed heartbreaking that President Obama's executive action on immigration was not upheld by the Supreme Court.
Every cloud have a silver lining. This decision will motivate Hispanic and other immigrant groups to vote for Hillary Clinton as they will be more marginalized by the GOP.
There will be plenty of gloating and self congratulations by Republicans but the race is still young.
Every cloud have a silver lining. This decision will motivate Hispanic and other immigrant groups to vote for Hillary Clinton as they will be more marginalized by the GOP.
There will be plenty of gloating and self congratulations by Republicans but the race is still young.
64
President Obama was a good leader by trying to get ahold of the immigration situation. It is maddening that people like John McCain and Marco Rubio walked away from their one-time understanding that it is better to bring these individuals "out of the shadows", when immigration reform went against Republican orthodoxy. Congressional Republicans could not pass their own bill, but were quick to threaten suing President Obama for picking up the slack.
6
Adding insult to injury, President Obama's plan might have been upheld, had there been a tie-breaking 9th Justice, whose absence is due to Senate Republicans' unwillingness to allow him his Constitutional right to nominate Supreme Court judges.
5
The President's immigration executive actions were arguably egregious for bypassing the body responsible for making those laws - the Congress.
As a short-term view, it must be heart breaking for the President who put much time and capital into this. From a larger perspective, the Supreme Court delivered the right decision and avoided a dangerous precedent to future Presidents.
Now what would the Supreme Court say about someone having a private e-mail server in an effort to thwart legal and congressional oversight ? In the short-term, that might avoid losing an election, but its long-term precedent is incalculably disconcerting.
As a short-term view, it must be heart breaking for the President who put much time and capital into this. From a larger perspective, the Supreme Court delivered the right decision and avoided a dangerous precedent to future Presidents.
Now what would the Supreme Court say about someone having a private e-mail server in an effort to thwart legal and congressional oversight ? In the short-term, that might avoid losing an election, but its long-term precedent is incalculably disconcerting.
23
No, Obama's overreaching is not "in limbo" as the decision of the 5th Circuit stands as decided. Obama's unconstitutional 'executive orders' are finally being challenged on constitutional grounds and decided correctly.
25
I couldn't disagree more. A president using "executive discretion" to not enforce a law in order to reward an important political constituency is not a dereliction of his duty to "faithfully execute the law?"
All this talk about how awful it is about these illegal immigrant being in "limbo" should not draw an ounce of empathy. That's like saying, well, since they've sneaked through, they've now squatted long enough and we're not courageous enough to do anything about it... Free Pass!
Since when did the US stop being a nation of laws?
All this talk about how awful it is about these illegal immigrant being in "limbo" should not draw an ounce of empathy. That's like saying, well, since they've sneaked through, they've now squatted long enough and we're not courageous enough to do anything about it... Free Pass!
Since when did the US stop being a nation of laws?
60
If you want open borders so we can have lots of cheap unskilled labor to do our gardening, housekeeping, and harvesting our crops, say so. But don't argue that we should give preferential treatment to those who broke the law and penalize those who waited years to immigrate legally.
There are lots of deserving people who would love to immigrate to the US. Do we favor those who, through an accident of geography, are close to the US and can therefore more easily enter illegally?
Increase total annual immigration - yes. Reward those who came here illegally - no.
There are lots of deserving people who would love to immigrate to the US. Do we favor those who, through an accident of geography, are close to the US and can therefore more easily enter illegally?
Increase total annual immigration - yes. Reward those who came here illegally - no.
52
We already let in lots of people. We don't need more.
2
You're right "limbo is a poor word for a state of fear and frustration" but for any Republican representatives whose states have a noticeable Latino population, "limbo lower now."
2
Presidents swear to "take care" that the laws be faithfully executed; they do not swear to make laws. The incumbent apparently did not understand that, and Texas helped focus our "Professor of Constitutional Law in Chief" on what his job requires (as opposed to what he might like it to).
21
FYI >>""Section 329 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act specifically states that foreign nationals who have served honorably during wartime or during periods of time in which the United States was engaged in armed conflict may secure citizenship whether or not they have been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence.""
>>>>So, the illegals or immigrants as Obama loves to call them CAN serve in the military to gain their citizenship.... So much for all this POOF and FLUFF that man is putting out.... ALL This man is doing is to GAIN VOTES for Hillary in the upcoming election... HE made PIPE DREAM PROMISES to get VOTED in for President and then HE knew that he could not keep the promises because he also KNEW it was not up to the President! It was always up to CONGRESS and SENATE.... always has been on most all matters.. The LAWS are clear on Illegals and Immigration and voting on this matter would not change the LAWS .... So FOLKS, ITS ALL JUST FOR VOTES... AMERICA WAKE UP !!
>>>>So, the illegals or immigrants as Obama loves to call them CAN serve in the military to gain their citizenship.... So much for all this POOF and FLUFF that man is putting out.... ALL This man is doing is to GAIN VOTES for Hillary in the upcoming election... HE made PIPE DREAM PROMISES to get VOTED in for President and then HE knew that he could not keep the promises because he also KNEW it was not up to the President! It was always up to CONGRESS and SENATE.... always has been on most all matters.. The LAWS are clear on Illegals and Immigration and voting on this matter would not change the LAWS .... So FOLKS, ITS ALL JUST FOR VOTES... AMERICA WAKE UP !!
18
"...the absolute refusal by congressional Republicans to reform an unjust system..."
To be clear: The "unjust system" is the system that would deport people who enter and/or stay in this country illegally. Not once does the editorial mention that these people are here illegally; only that the"system" designed to remedy this, is "unjust". These people are not left in limbo, as the editorial says. Their status remains as it was; they are aliens here illegally.
To be clear: The "unjust system" is the system that would deport people who enter and/or stay in this country illegally. Not once does the editorial mention that these people are here illegally; only that the"system" designed to remedy this, is "unjust". These people are not left in limbo, as the editorial says. Their status remains as it was; they are aliens here illegally.
73
The editorial uses the word "unauthorized" as opposed to "illegal." Does that really make a difference to you?
1
If they really mean that bad SB744, that wasn't a "reform" at all. That would not have strengthened border security, nor proper tracking of visas and increased H1b visas. With extra goodies to corporations and foreign interests.
In fact, just about every immigration initiative proposed by Obama has included large increases to the number of H1b visas. Why is that?
In fact, just about every immigration initiative proposed by Obama has included large increases to the number of H1b visas. Why is that?
6
Euphemisms like "unauthorized" or "undocumented" obfuscate the true status of these individuals. They are here illegally. But that is the point of euphemisms, to make it seem all so innocuous, when in fact it isn't. So yes, it makes a difference to me. And I'll bet it makes a difference to you. I'll bet you never refer to these individuals as immigrants or aliens that are here illegally.
6
Well... One presidential candidate is going to give millions of illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, and the other candidate is going to deport all of them en masse and build a wall to try and keep them out. So... The choice is pretty obvious.
14
Agreed. I prefer an America for Americans.
43
@Ray: Has it occurred to you that people from Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras also happen to be Americans? Unlike most everything else, we don't own that word.
11
Yes. Send illegals home!
7
The editorial board should know that the true issue isn't "prosecutorial discretion." The executive branch is always free to prioritize certain enforcement strategies over others. Just as Mr. Obama decided not to deport various illegal immigrants, a future president could use that discretion to forgo prosecuting tax fraud, corporate tax evasion, etc. And, rest assured, future Republican presidents will point to Mr. Obama's actions to justify theirs. Perhaps more interesting is the Times' tone-deafness to public opinion on this topic. People don't oppose legal immigration, but they oppose efforts to reward those who came here without complying with our laws. They oppose the Times' unstated, but plain, desire to have no immigration restrictions. They oppose the attempt to make this country the only functioning nation-state in the world that doesn't enforce its immigration laws. If you're unhappy with the legislative branch's response, the answer is the change the legislature; it is not to create new executive powers in contravention of the Constitution.
68
Obama won't be able to push this one through but Clinton will be able to. When the GOP read by how much they will have lost this year, and see that this is another losing argument for them, and will continue to be a losing issue for them they might see the light.
Obama has done a lot of the hard work, it'll be up to Clinton to finish the work. Garland will be a shoo-in come next year.
Obama has done a lot of the hard work, it'll be up to Clinton to finish the work. Garland will be a shoo-in come next year.
11
I don't care for the libs, progressives or, whatever u want to call yourselves. Your President, our President, had the house, senate and of course the executive branch for two years. He could have done gun control, he could have done immigration; he chose neither, opting for health care via back door deals plus some deceit. So, here we r and u libs take 0 responsibility for the current state of our union. I won't even start on what you have done to our inner cities such as Chicago, Baltimore and Detroit where libs have been in charge forever. I'm blaming Obama for his lack of leadership on all of these issues. Sure he can give a good speech but, as far as bringing different points of view for bi partisan legislation he gets a big fat F
38
That is a specious argument. He did not have a filibuster proof legislature. He had a GOP that vowed to make him a one term president. They were bale to prevent many proposals from coming to a vote.
25
Sure David, that's your back up position on every issue. Oh the republicans were against him from the beginning. That's where presidential leadership is necessary, stepping above the fray and getting bi partisan deals done. No way did he exhibit that kind of leadership.Sorry
5
Unfortunately they were not able to make him a one term president.
2
Your final word in this editorial, "injustice" is the virtual invasion of the US by these millions of illegal immigrants.
97
Capital (money) roams the world free to seek out the cheapest labor. But labor (people) are "illegal" when crossing borders to find work. Many things were illegal in the past...blacks drinking from the wrong water fountain, or stopping at the wrong motel, etc. These immigration laws, that republicans refuse to fix, will soon be gone along with the republicans.
8
People are illegal when they break our laws. The last thing we should do is encourage yet more unskilled Latinos to break into our society and raise burdens even further on Americans.
7
Better to spare the American people the continued trespass of illegal aliens than to spare the illegal aliens from being deported.
The most sensible thing to do is to immediately expel all illegal aliens from our country. It just makes good sense.
The most sensible thing to do is to immediately expel all illegal aliens from our country. It just makes good sense.
57
Whose taxes are going to pay for a police action of that magnitude? Mexicans'?
11
You realize that it would cost an absolute fortune? It is not practical even if you don't care about the moral issues of rounding up and detaining 11 million men, women and children in camps. Mass deportations are considered atrocities and crimes against humanity. People would die; families would be split up; and millions of people would suffer.
1
Let me first say that it is refreshing to see that your only concern is the cost of expelling these interlopers from our country. Secondly, let me assure you that the American people will proudly pay taxes to rid our country of illegal aliens and secure for our citizens all of the blessings of the country that we and our forbears built for ourselves.
"We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too."
John F. Kennedy
"We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too."
John F. Kennedy
2
Maybe the Democrats should ask themselves why they did so poorly in the last elections. If they had done better, they might have been able to pass the legislation Obama wanted. But because of Obama's failed policies, they lost. That's how democracy works. Now they and the NYT are on a big crying jag because they didn't get their way. Grow up!
39
The Democrats lost the house because the economic recovery was slow, and the GOP was able to convince the voters it was his fault. The voters mostly being ignorant of economics, but opinionated about it, had been convinced the economy could recover in a few months. And they were mad about the banks getting a boost in reserves to stop runs on them. They call it a bailout. It saved them from a great depression but they do not understand that.
22
The "bailout" of the banks (TARP) did save the country from a great depression. Amazingly, an unpopular 700 billion dollar expenditure was passed through Congress in ten days. And who was the president who provided the remarkable leadership that saved us--George W. Bush.
3
David,
Even the "dimmest bulb" understood that the banks got the money and no one went to jail! That's why you lost the election!
Even the "dimmest bulb" understood that the banks got the money and no one went to jail! That's why you lost the election!
2
It is now very clear why the Senate needs to do its job and get on with approving the 9th justice to the Supreme court. The Republican disregard for their constitutional duty is outrageous.
Lets all make sure they pay for their sins in November. Their actions are unforgivable.
Lets all make sure they pay for their sins in November. Their actions are unforgivable.
33
You know that advice and consent part of the constitution? Their job is not to rubber stamp a justice. I pray were not in the samsituation with a Trump presidency, but the senate would be just as wise and appropriate in that case. The senate has withheld consent when the president rejected their advice.
The NYT should separate their position on this particular issue and focus on the more important point: The executive branch was infringing on the legislative branch's right to legislate. The executive branch carries out the laws that the legislative branch enacts. Rewriting law in a fundamental way that affects millions of people is not prosecutorial discretion; it is gross executive overreach.
64
What slack, when did the US cease to be a country governed by laws and when was the US President given the power to write new law?
4
This was never "executive overreach." Where millions of innocent lives are at stake it is obvious that this big decision will have far-reaching consequences. But that by itself does not make it "over-reach." The president, who heads a co-equal branch of the government, is charged with enforcing the laws and has limited resources to do so. There are millions of hard-working, creative, tax-paying, society-building people with no criminal backgrounds, frozen out of normal participation in our communities because of a Republican strategy (a self-defeating one at that) intent on denying the president and opposing party the policy and political achievement of helping fold those people into our society. Welcoming and supporting the stranger is a policy consistent with the best parts of our history and nourishes us all. The president has every right to advance justice as he sees it so long as he does not violate the law, and prosecutorial discretion in this area is within the law because it has never been prohibited to him by statute.I am proud of our president's effort to go beyond political posturing to serve the disadvantaged people within our borders who do us no harm and remind us we all descended from immigarants.
4
The NYT could care less about such things. Whatever advances the progressive agenda is good to go. This is precisely why they are cheerleaders for all of Obama's overreach.
1
Hopefully, this latest injustice will be enough to get the Latino community fired up and get each and every eligible voter registered and then show up at the polls in Nov. States such as Texas and Arizona that are leading the way in the campaign against immigration reform have huge Latino populations. If the Democratic Party had any sense, it would assist in any way possible, overcoming these restrictive voter suppression laws by helping people acquire the necessary photo I.D.'s.
The Latino population can flex its muscles and fight back at the ballot box. With Trump heading the GOP ticket, this is the time if there ever was one.
The Latino population can flex its muscles and fight back at the ballot box. With Trump heading the GOP ticket, this is the time if there ever was one.
43
I think the latino population is a little less monolithic and narrow-minded than your post implies.
2
There is a cure for this problem. These immigrants need an association that can acquire enough money that it could pay the bills of those without papers so that they could go on a general strike for a month.
Then you would see just how much they contribute to the economy. When the hotel maids do not show up for work, see if your kid who is complaining about the high price of school is willing to take their place as an example. Just look around you at the work that has always been don by first generation immigrants and see if your kids apply for those jobs.
Some smart person is going to organize these people and give them economic power, the need another Cesar Chavez.
Then you would see just how much they contribute to the economy. When the hotel maids do not show up for work, see if your kid who is complaining about the high price of school is willing to take their place as an example. Just look around you at the work that has always been don by first generation immigrants and see if your kids apply for those jobs.
Some smart person is going to organize these people and give them economic power, the need another Cesar Chavez.
36
When they had a day without an immigrant in Los Angeles several years ago, all that happened is that legal residents traded work hours with the undocumented. Everything went along as normal except that a greater proportion of the clerks in the stores were Caucasian than is usually the case. However, if the undocumented went on a general strike for a month, employers would figure out a way to get along without them before the month ran out. In this dog eat dog world of ours, no one is irreplaceable. Sorry, but that’s just how it is. You’re nice but naive.
15
Thanks to hi tech and Free Trade pacts, our country has lost working class jobs. Why should we let illegal immigrants scoop up the jobs that are left when our own citizens and legal immigrants desperately need them? Cesar Chavez was against illegal immigration. He recognized that citizens and legal residents have families to support. Where is your empathy for them?
25
@J Eric: They'd be able to get along without them because they'd also be able to find other undocumented immigrants to take their place.
@Ann: In the event you haven't noticed, unemployment is down to under 5%. "Illegals" aren't taking many jobs away from U.S. citizens who'd be inclined to do that work if it were offered to them- and almost certainly not for the below-minimum salaries that those "illegals" receive. In either case, blame the employers, not the workers. If the former didn't knowingly hire the latter, those workers wouldn't be crossing the border to come here.
@Ann: In the event you haven't noticed, unemployment is down to under 5%. "Illegals" aren't taking many jobs away from U.S. citizens who'd be inclined to do that work if it were offered to them- and almost certainly not for the below-minimum salaries that those "illegals" receive. In either case, blame the employers, not the workers. If the former didn't knowingly hire the latter, those workers wouldn't be crossing the border to come here.
5
What injustice? You violate US immigration laws, you commit crimes against American citizens, you utilize public services especially ERs at taxpayer expense, you steal Social Security IDs to work here illegally, what injustice are we talking about? Is it that you cannot feed at the Government trough and might get sent back to your native country, is that the injustice? Or is the injustice that the American taxpayers no longer have to foot the bill for your stay in the US after you are deported? Please tell me because all I can think of is the injustice that Justice Scalia is not alive to have cast the deciding vote to send you all back asap. That's the injustice.