|
|
|
U.S. Will Stop Deporting Some Illegal Immigrants Who
Came Here As Children
By Peter Wallsten and William Branigin
Updated Friday, June 15, 2:49 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/us-will-stop-deporting-some-illegal-immigrants-who-came-here-as-children/2012/06/15/gJQANBbseV_story.html
President Obama said Friday his administration will
block deportations of hundreds of thousands of young
illegal immigrants who had been brought to the country
as children, declaring that it was "the right thing to
do" for those affected and for the country.
"Effective immediately, the Department of Homeland
Security is taking steps to lift the shadow of
deportation from these young people," Obama said in an
appearance in the White House Rose Garden. "Over the
next few months, eligible individuals who do not present
a risk to national security or public safety will be
able to request temporary relief from deportation
proceedings and apply for work authorization."
He said the action was being taken in the absence of any
move in Congress "to fix our broken immigration system."
He described the step as a "temporary" measure and urged
lawmakers to pass more permanent solutions such as the
DREAM Act and comprehensive immigration reform.
"This is not amnesty," Obama declared. "This is not
immunity. This is not a path to citizenship. It's not a
permanent fix. This is a temporary stopgap measure that
lets us focus our resources wisely, while giving a
degree of relief and hope to talented, driven, patriotic
young people. It is the right thing to do."
Obama's remarks were interrupted by a questioner who
attempted to challenge him on the new policy. The
president rebuffed the attempt, but said later: "In
answer to your question, this is the right thing to do
for the American people."
The announcement, made initially by Homeland Security
Secretary Janet Napolitano in a statement Friday
morning, effectively ends a years-long standoff with
Hispanic activists who are crucial to the president's
reelection campaign.
"Our nation's immigration laws must be enforced in a
firm and sensible manner," Napolitano said. "But they
are not designed to be blindly enforced without
consideration given to the individual circumstances of
each case. Nor are they designed to remove productive
young people to countries where they may not have lived
or even speak the language. Discretion, which is used in
so many other areas, is especially justified here."
The issue has been a major point of contention between
immigration advocates and Obama. Advocates have spent
months urging the president to take executive action to
spare many young illegal immigrants from deportation,
and until now Obama has insisted that he did not have
the authority to do so.
As word spread of the announcement early Friday , the
same advocates who have been sparring with the president
and his aides began heaping praise on the
administration.
Deepak Bhargava, director of the Center for Community
Change who had two tense encounters with Obama during
2010, on Friday credited the president with a "bold act
to uphold our values and protect our kids."
"Approximately 1 million young people will have their
dreams restored thanks to the principled leadership of
President Obama," Bhargava said.
The new policy drew an immediate rebuke from Rep. Lamar
Smith (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Judiciary
Committee and a leading GOP critic of Obama's
immigration policies. He charged that the president was
playing partisan politics and had committed a "breach of
faith with the American people."
The action "also blatantly ignores the rule of law that
is the foundation of our democracy," Smith said. "This
huge policy shift has horrible consequences for
unemployed Americans looking for jobs and violates
President Obama's oath to uphold the laws of this land."
The policy is designed to aid immigrants who would have
been affected by the DREAM Act, a Democratic-backed bill
that would have put many students and veterans on a path
to citizenship but failed to win passage in Congress.
The White House had been reluctant to go around Congress
to resolve the issue, but began to feel pressure from
advocates when a prominent Hispanic Republican, Sen.
Marco Rubio of Florida, began working with activists on
a scaled-back version of the bill.
In a statement Friday, Rubio criticized Obama's action,
though with carefully tempered language.
"There is broad support for the idea that we should
figure out a way to help kids who are undocumented
through no fault of their own, but there is also broad
consensus that it should be done in a way that does not
encourage illegal immigration in the future," Rubio
said. "This is a difficult balance to strike, one that
this new policy, imposed by executive order, will make
harder to achieve in the long run."
He said the announcement "will be welcome news for many
of these kids desperate for an answer, but it is a
short-term answer to a long-term problem. And by once
again ignoring the Constitution and going around
Congress, this short-term policy will make it harder to
find a balanced and responsible long-term one."
Administration officials said that, contrary to Rubio's
assertion, the change was not imposed by executive
order. Rather, they said, it represents a shift in the
way that deportation resources are focused.
The move puts pressure on presumptive Republican
presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who ran to the right
of the field on immigration during the GOP primaries.
At a Christian Science Monitor breakfast Friday, former
Mississippi governor Haley Barbour (R) forcefully
advocated for a program of legalization for illegal
immigrants currently in the country.
"We're not going to deport 12 million people, and we
shouldn't," said Barbour, who is now helping head the
leading pro-Romney super PAC. He pointed out that in
many industries, such as the chicken-processing plants
in his home state, immigrants are willing to take jobs
that no one else will.
"We need more people in America who want to work, in my
opinion," Barbour said. "We need to have a path, not to
citizenship, but to a secure knowledge that they can
continue to work."
Sen. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), the No. 2 Democrat in the
Senate and a chief sponsor of the DREAM Act, called the
administration's move a "historic humanitarian moment."
He added in a statement: "This action will give these
young immigrants their chance to come out of the shadows
and be part of the only country they've ever called
home. These young people did not make the decision to
come to this country, and it is not the American way to
punish children for their parents' actions."
He said that "this presidential action was absolutely
necessary to serve the cause of justice" because the
House has refused to consider the DREAM Act and Senate
Republicans have used the filibuster to block it.
But Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the top Republican
on the Senate Judiciary Committee, blasted the move as
an abuse of authority.
"The president's action is an affront to the process of
representative government by circumventing Congress and
with a directive he may not have the authority to
execute," Grassley said. "It seems the president has put
election-year politics above responsible policies. On
top of providing amnesty to those under 30 years old,
the administration now will be granting work
authorizations to illegal immigrants at the same time
young Americans face record-high unemployment rates.
Americans also deserve to know how this amnesty program
for hundreds of thousands of people will be funded, and
whether resources for border security and enforcement
will be diverted. Congress has the authority to write
immigration laws, and with this order the President is
disregarding the voice of the people through their
elected representatives in Congress."
According to the Department of Homeland Security,
eligible immigrants will now receive "deferred action,"
which essentially means a two-year reprieve from
deportation along with a permit that allows them to
work. The deferral will be available to any immigrants
who came to the United States under the age of 16, have
lived in the country continuously for at least five
years, and are currently in the country. They must be
currently in school, have graduated from high school,
have obtained a general education development
certificate, or be honorably discharged veterans of the
military or the Coast Guard.
They also must not be more than 30 years old must never
have been convicted of a felony, a significant
misdemeanor, multiple misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise
pose a threat to national security or public safety.
While the policy does not create a path to U.S.
citizenship, it removes the threat of deportation for
those who are eligible and gives them permission to work
in the United States legally.
"DHS continues to focus its enforcement resources on the
removal of individuals who pose a national security or
public safety risk, including immigrants convicted of
crimes, violent criminals, felons, and repeat
immigration law offenders," the department said in a
statement. "Today's action further enhances the
department's ability to focus on these priority
removals."
The administration announced the new policy a week
before Obama was scheduled to address the National
Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials'
annual conference in Orlando. Romney is scheduled to
speak to the group on Thursday, the Associated Press
reported.
Immigration has played a prominent role in this year's
presidential election campaign. Polls show Obama easily
beating his Romney among Hispanics.
But enthusiasm has cooled toward the president amid
growing anxiety over the deportations and his inability
to push for passage of a broader immigration overhaul to
legalize the estimated 11 million people in the United
States illegally. Obama's reelection strategy depends on
a strong Hispanic turnout in states such as Colorado,
Nevada, New Mexico and Florida.
Romney staked out a hard-line stance against illegal
immigration during the primaries, and some conservatives
are pushing him to pick Rubio as his running mate as a
way to peel away some of Obama's Hispanic support.
Seeking to head off attacks from conservatives,
administration officials said Friday that the policy
does not grant "amnesty."
Young people will have to prove their eligibility with
documentation. Those who are granted the relief are not
put on a path to citizenship, and they would have to
apply separately for a work permit.
After two years, they would have to reapply for another
deferral - a potential danger if Obama loses reelection
and Romney were to reverse the new policy.
The new policy came after an intense lobbying effort
from Democratic lawmakers and immigration advocates, who
had engaged in a series of often emotional and
adversarial meetings with the president.
Durbin, who first sponsored the DREAM Act 11 years ago
and has pushed it ever since, said he had spoken with
Obama as recently as six months ago about the issue of
deportations, and the president believed that earlier
policy shifts had taken care of the problem. He became
convinced as the senators showed him more examples of
young people facing deportation that the problem had not
been resolved.
Last year, the administration put into place what
officials called "prosecutorial discretion," which
encouraged immigration officials to focus on deporting
high-priority people, such as felons, repeat border
crossers and others who posed security risks. But
advocates have been disappointed in the results, and
officials have continued to put DREAM Act-eligible
people into deportation proceedings.
Durbin, in an interview, called the administration's
action a "big relief" and said he hoped that the young
people granted deferrals would serve as an example to
convince Americans of the need to pass the legislation
that might give them a more permanent status. He
compared Obama's action Friday to earlier decisions by
the United States to grant humanitarian relief to Cuban
refugees.
"Over time, they're going to make their own case," he
said. "They're going to prove it with their lives and
what they do, now that they've come out of the shadows
and people realize who they are."
c The Washington Post Company
___________________________________________
Portside aims to provide material of interest to people
on the left that will help them to interpret the world
and to change it.
Submit via email: [log in to unmask]
Submit via the Web: http://portside.org/submittous3
Frequently asked questions: http://portside.org/faq
Sub/Unsub: http://portside.org/subscribe-and-unsubscribe
Search Portside archives: http://portside.org/archive
Contribute to Portside: https://portside.org/donate
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archives |
May 2013, Week 3 May 2013, Week 2 May 2013, Week 1 April 2013, Week 5 April 2013, Week 4 April 2013, Week 3 April 2013, Week 2 April 2013, Week 1 March 2013, Week 5 March 2013, Week 4 March 2013, Week 3 March 2013, Week 2 March 2013, Week 1 February 2013, Week 4 February 2013, Week 3 February 2013, Week 2 February 2013, Week 1 January 2013, Week 5 January 2013, Week 4 January 2013, Week 3 January 2013, Week 2 January 2013, Week 1 December 2012, Week 5 December 2012, Week 4 December 2012, Week 3 December 2012, Week 2 December 2012, Week 1 November 2012, Week 5 November 2012, Week 4 November 2012, Week 3 November 2012, Week 2 November 2012, Week 1 October 2012, Week 5 October 2012, Week 4 October 2012, Week 3 October 2012, Week 2 October 2012, Week 1 September 2012, Week 5 September 2012, Week 4 September 2012, Week 3 September 2012, Week 2 September 2012, Week 1 August 2012, Week 5 August 2012, Week 4 August 2012, Week 3 August 2012, Week 2 August 2012, Week 1 July 2012, Week 5 July 2012, Week 4 July 2012, Week 3 July 2012, Week 2 July 2012, Week 1 June 2012, Week 5 June 2012, Week 4 June 2012, Week 3 June 2012, Week 2 June 2012, Week 1 May 2012, Week 5 May 2012, Week 4 May 2012, Week 3 May 2012, Week 2 May 2012, Week 1 April 2012, Week 5 April 2012, Week 4 April 2012, Week 3 April 2012, Week 2 April 2012, Week 1 March 2012, Week 5 March 2012, Week 4 March 2012, Week 3 March 2012, Week 2 March 2012, Week 1 February 2012, Week 5 February 2012, Week 4 February 2012, Week 3 February 2012, Week 2 February 2012, Week 1 January 2012, Week 5 January 2012, Week 4 January 2012, Week 3 January 2012, Week 2 January 2012, Week 1 December 2011, Week 5 December 2011, Week 4 December 2011, Week 3 December 2011, Week 2 December 2011, Week 1 November 2011, Week 5 November 2011, Week 4 November 2011, Week 3 November 2011, Week 2 November 2011, Week 1 October 2011, Week 5 October 2011, Week 4 October 2011, Week 3 October 2011, Week 2 October 2011, Week 1 September 2011, Week 5 September 2011, Week 4 September 2011, Week 3 September 2011, Week 2 September 2011, Week 1 August 2011, Week 5 August 2011, Week 4 August 2011, Week 3 August 2011, Week 2 August 2011, Week 1 July 2011, Week 5 July 2011, Week 4 July 2011, Week 3 July 2011, Week 2 July 2011, Week 1 June 2011, Week 5 June 2011, Week 4 June 2011, Week 3 June 2011, Week 2 June 2011, Week 1 May 2011, Week 5 May 2011, Week 4 May 2011, Week 3 May 2011, Week 2 May 2011, Week 1 April 2011, Week 5 April 2011, Week 4 April 2011, Week 3 April 2011, Week 2 April 2011, Week 1 March 2011, Week 5 March 2011, Week 4 March 2011, Week 3 March 2011, Week 2 March 2011, Week 1 February 2011, Week 4 February 2011, Week 3 February 2011, Week 2 February 2011, Week 1 January 2011, Week 5 January 2011, Week 4 January 2011, Week 3 January 2011, Week 2 January 2011, Week 1 December 2010, Week 5 December 2010, Week 4 December 2010, Week 3 December 2010, Week 2 December 2010, Week 1 November 2010, Week 5 November 2010, Week 4 November 2010, Week 3 November 2010, Week 2 November 2010, Week 1 October 2010, Week 5 October 2010, Week 4 October 2010, Week 3 October 2010, Week 2 October 2010, Week 1 September 2010, Week 5 September 2010, Week 4 September 2010, Week 3 September 2010, Week 2 September 2010, Week 1 August 2010, Week 5 August 2010, Week 4 August 2010, Week 3 August 2010, Week 2 August 2010, Week 1 July 2010, Week 5 July 2010, Week 4 July 2010, Week 3 July 2010, Week 2 July 2010, Week 1
|
|