Utah politicians respond to Trump’s dropping DACA program protecting young immigrants

ST. GEORGE – The Trump administration made the expected announcement Tuesday that a program that has protected nearly 800,000 immigrants who were brought into the county illegally as children is being phased out.

An Obama-era program created by executive order, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, is considered to be “an unconstitutional exercise of authority,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Tuesday, and therefore must be revoked.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions makes a statement at the Justice Department on President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA program. President Donald Trump’s administration will “wind down” a program protecting hundreds of thousands of young immigrants who were brought into the country illegally as children, Sessions declared, calling the Obama administration’s program “an unconstitutional exercise of authority.” District of Columbia, Sept. 5, 2017 | AP photo/Susan Walsh, St. George News

“I’m here today to announce that the program known as DACA that was effectuated under the Obama administration is being rescinded,” Sessions said.

DACA has provided the young immigrants the ability to work legally within the United States without fear of deportation via two-year, renewable permits. With Tuesday’s announcement new applications have been halted.

Young immigrants who have benefited from the program have come to be known as “Dreamers.”

The program is set to be phased out over the next six months during which time the government will continue to process permits already in the system.

According to Department of Homeland Security officials, people with permits whose renewals are set to expire between now and March 5, 2018, will be able to reapply — so long as their applications are submitted by Oct. 5 this year. No permits will be revoked before their existing expiration dates, they said, and applications already in the pipeline will be processed.

The decision has drawn both favor and criticism.

“I called the president last week to urge him not to rescind DACA because I believe it puts Dreamers, who were brought here as children through no fault of their own, in an extremely difficult position,” Sen. Orrin Hatch said Tuesday.

Hatch continued:

I agree with the president — we need tougher enforcement of our immigration laws, but we also need a real, permanent solution that recognizes the positive impact Dreamers have in our communities. And as I said last week, that solution must come from Congress.

Immigration is a complex issue, but I believe we have a real opportunity for bipartisan solutions and compromise on issues including border security, high-skilled immigration, and a path forward for our dreamer populations

Last week, Utah’s Rep. Chris Stewart called DACA a “good-intentioned” program, yet said its creation by then President Barack Obama was unconstitutional. The authority to create programs like DACA “clearly lies within the purviews of Congress,” he said.

Sen. Mike Lee shared that sentiment in his own statement Tuesday.

“DACA was an illegal abuse of executive power, and it’s important to reaffirm that the president cannot unilaterally rewrite the law,” Lee said. “Today’s decision puts the ball in Congress’ court to address the problem of the approximately three-quarter million DACA participants, who originally came to the country as children. A balance between compassion and deterring future illegal immigration can be found.”

Hispanic members of the Utah Legislature sent a letter to the Utah congressional delegation asking it to protect those enrolled in the DACA program.

Supporters of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, chant slogans and holds signs while joining a Labor Day rally in downtown earlier this week. President Donald Trump announced Tuesday that he will end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, but with a six-month delay, according to two people familiar with the decision-making, Los Angeles, Sept. 4, 2017 | AP Photo/Richard Vogel, St. George News

We call upon you, as elected federal representatives of this state, to take immediate action and protect the hundreds of thousands of Americans who are enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA). These young men and women — known as Dreamers — were brought to this country as children. Many of them know no other home but this country. They grew up here, they’ve gone to school here, many have served our nation in the military, and they deserve a chance to build lives in this great nation; to do what so many immigrants have done throughout our history: to make America even greater.

Sen. Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City; Rep. Rebecca Chavez-Houck, D-Salt Lake City; Rep. Angela Romero, D-Salt Lake City; and Rep. Mark Wheatley, D-Murray, each signed the letter.

The letter can be read in its entirety here.

Trump, in a statement, said the change would be “a gradual process, not a sudden phase out.”

“Thus,” he said, “in effect, I am not going to just cut DACA off, but rather provide a window of opportunity for Congress to finally act.”

He does not favor punishing children for the actions of their parents, but said, “we must also recognize that we are a nation of opportunity because we are a nation of law” and “young Americans have dreams, too.”

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio appealed to the White House for more clarity about what Trump is willing to sign.

“Congress now has less than six months to deal with this the right way, through the legislative process,” he said, adding, “We have no time to waste on ideas that do not have the votes to pass or that the president won’t sign.”

Former president Barack Obama, date unspecified | stock image, St. George News

Among those who criticized Trump’s decision to end DACA was Obama who took to Facebook. An excerpt from his Facebook post is featured below.

… My administration acted to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.

But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest young people once again.

Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes also commented, issuing a statement Monday in which he said it would be “inhumane” of Congress not to find a solution for the Dreamers, many of whom have only known the United States as their home.

He said in part:

It is unconscionable to deport a young person who came to this country as a child or even infant without any choice of their own. These kids are our kids too. They grew up next door to you and me, played on the Little League teams we coached, went to school with our children, worked in local businesses, and by and large, they are leading productive lives contributing to our economy and the strength of America.

These children grew up believing they are American and so many of them have lived lives of which America can be proud. Rather than deporting those in whom America has already invested a great deal of resources, I urge Congress to pass legislation that provides a workable path forward so these young people can prove their ongoing commitment to this country and benefit all of us with their talents and skills. This can be done as we strengthen borders, security, and the economic viability of America.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Email: mkessler@stgnews.com

Twitter: @MoriKessler

Copyright St. George News, SaintGeorgeUtah.com LLC, 2017, all rights reserved.

Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!

63 Comments

  • Brian September 5, 2017 at 3:29 pm

    We have two polarized view on this, and both are right in some ways and both are wrong in some ways. The solution lies somewhere in the middle. To actually solve this problem long term we need to:

    1) End DACA immediately for all new arrivals. As we saw it serves as a huge magnet for illegal immigration.

    2) Repeal the 14th amendment to take away the incentive to come here to give birth. This amendment was meant to give citizenship to the children of parents brought here against their will as slaves, not to encourage illegal immigration.

    3) Secure our border. There are many reasons to do this, and none have to do with race.

    4) Those already here, who indeed have spent most of their lives here since being young children and live as though they were already citizens should be given a pathway to citizenship. This should be done on a case-by-case basis, over time, and NOT be a blanket amnesty. People should be thoroughly vetted and given citizenship based on their merit and character, not just because they’ve managed to get here. No other country on earth hands out citizenship like that, and neither should we.

    5) Congress (not POTUS, regardless of party) should reform immigration to be merit based and limited to 1 million per year. Those here illegally that aren’t covered in #4 should be given legal status (a way to work, pay taxes, stay out of the shadows, etc that makes them long-term visitors), but not citizenship, with no path to citizenship, no voting rights, etc. Same status for kids they have here. Anything otherwise is entirely unfair to those obeying the law and standing in line waiting for citizenship. We don’t accept cutting in line at the bank, at Disneyland, at a restaurant, or in traffic, we shouldn’t accept if for something as precious as citizenship.

    • John September 6, 2017 at 9:15 am

      The 14th amendment has co clause in it to cover the children brought here by their illegal alien parents . It only applies to those born on American soil . Another unconstitutional over reaching executive order has been reversed . Now it is time for the Democrats to do some work and quit crying about losing the election. Seems like all they can do anymore is cry and complain. Do what you were elected to do and represent the people and quit the “poor me” whining ! America is growing tired of it already !

      • Brian September 6, 2017 at 10:00 am

        I agree the 14th doesn’t justify DACA (Constitutionally nothing does). I’m saying the children of illegal immigrants born on US soil shouldn’t be citizens (whereas now they are). We shouldn’t hand out citizenship just because someone broke into our country to have a baby (or had one while here illegally). To do so is ludicrous. If a pregnant woman breaks into Bill Gates house and has her baby, is that baby now a “Gates” and heir to the Gates estate? Of course not!

        • John September 6, 2017 at 10:36 am

          That’s right ! Congress has to address this disaster which never should have been done in the first place. A sitting president does not have the power to override The Constitution ! Obama did and Trump is making it right by putting the task where it should have been in the first place. They can either make it constitutional or they can drop it. It’s up to them to stop politicizing every little thing and do their job ! 2018 can’t come soon enough. A lot of them will be unemployed in November 2018 if they keep up with the foolishness !

        • bikeandfish September 6, 2017 at 10:59 am

          DACA’s constitutionality has yet to be tested. Executive use of discretionary enforcement is well established and supported by the Constitution. There is a split amongst scholars whether or not DACA qualified under those powers.

          Your comparison to breaking into the Gates property is a false analogy. The largest growth of undocumented immigrants are those here legally who remain past their legal time. There is no breaking in. A better example would be a guest overstaying their welcome.

          • Brian September 6, 2017 at 4:10 pm

            There is no breaking in? In 2015 there were 337,117 apprehensions at the border. DHS estimates that for every one caught there are two that get in. That means 674,000 people “breaking in” in 2015 alone. That same year there were 527,127 VISA overstays. So yes, both are happening in “YUGE” amounts and both are a serious problem.

          • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 9:27 am

            Breaking into a house is not the same as walking across an open border. Its a false analogy.

            A better example for those immigrants would be walking into a unmarked private property.

            Comparing undocumented immigrants to someone forcibly “breaking into” a home is an inflammatory comparison at best. There are vast differences between the two.

      • bikeandfish September 6, 2017 at 10:48 am

        DACA didn’t grant citizenship. It just provided temporary immunity from deportation efforts by requiring applicants engage in specific actions, like higher education, military service, etc.

    • ladybugavenger September 6, 2017 at 11:18 am

      I actually agree with Brian.

    • desertgirl September 6, 2017 at 1:15 pm

      Wrong is not following the law. Period.

  • bikeandfish September 5, 2017 at 3:41 pm

    Ending DACA clearly appears to be legal according to those familiar with executive power. Given no case works its way up the ladder to the SCOTUS its also fair to assume DACA was also a legal framework by Obama. I agree with others that ending it leaves too many young children vulnerable to the realities of statelessness and who have invested time and money following the program that was offered. These aren’t criminals but individuals who have contributed to our country in meaningful ways.

    No matter, it appears Trump has chosen to phase the program out so now Congress has the immediate need to pass legislation that respects the dignity and humanity of these individuals. The Utah AG agrees:

    “In my view, it would be inhumane if Congress fails to find a solution for those who may have come unlawfully as children but who are otherwise law abiding, productive, and committed to defending America….. I urge Congress to pass legislation that provides a workable path forward so these young people can prove their ongoing commitment to this country and benefit all of us with their talents and skills. This can be done as we strengthen borders, security, and the economic viability of America”

    I disagree with Trump but the decision was in his purview. Now the burden is on Congress. I can only hope all of those stepping up to critique Trump in Congress will do the hard work to pass a bill with equal protection and opportunity for the many hardworking children of undocumented immigrants.

  • comments September 5, 2017 at 3:50 pm

    All these “dreamer kids” are so wonderful, think what kind of positive effect they will have back home in mexico. MAKE MEXICO GREAT AGAIN. let’s get this going. plus, we got enough spanish speakers here, imagine what a positive thing it will be for mexico to get a huge influence of english speakers. All these dreamer kids might be able to pull mexico out of being a 3rd world crap hole. just imagine!

    • comments September 5, 2017 at 3:51 pm

      *imagine what a positive thing it will be for mexico to get a huge influx of english speakers.

    • ladybugavenger September 6, 2017 at 11:19 am

      Not a bad idea

  • comments September 5, 2017 at 3:54 pm

    and this is an issue that is getting old orrin a little too heated. he needs to take a nice long ice water bath. 48 hours at least. long enough to cool him down, hopefully for good. lol 😉

  • Walter1 September 5, 2017 at 7:12 pm

    If DACA supporters want congress to make a way for them to stay. A deal must be agreed to! President Trump must get appropriations from congress for a substantial border wall, The Raise Act must be passed, Kate’s law must be passed, E-verify must be mandated for all employers, Visa overstay verification must be implemented and birth rite citizenship must be challenged. Conservatives have been lied to many times in the past with unfulfilled immigration promises, especially in the 1986 Amnesty. President Trump will not get re-elected if he betrays his base. That is a FACT! The negotiations now begin… DACA kids can stay but illegal immigration must be halted and a more sensible merit based immigration policy must be adopted. The country will not survive anything less. Let the negotiations begin!

  • utahdiablo September 5, 2017 at 9:00 pm

    Laws are not created by a President…or did you forget that fact Senator Hatch? …So DACA, created by the Dictator in Chief Obama, was and is unconstitutional….so it is done, get over it…and stop crying that we do not allow anyone to immigrate into the USA: Since 2000, legal immigrants to the United States number approximately 1,000,000 per year, of whom about 600,000 are Change of Status who already are in the U.S. Legal immigrants to the United States now are at their highest level ever, at just over 37,000,000 legal immigrants.

    • bikeandfish September 6, 2017 at 9:41 am

      Your argument can be reduced to the idea that laws created by the POTUS are unconstitutional. I agree and so would most folks educated in basic American civics. But DACA is not a law so your argument is invalid. DACA is policy by the executive branch known as “enforcement discretion” which is accepted in most fields that must enforce law. It never provided a pathway to citizenship.

      But none of that matters as Trump had every legal right to dismantle the policy. That is and always will be the weakness of unilateral executive policies vs laws.

  • Caveat_Emptor September 6, 2017 at 8:53 am

    Everyone is entitled to an opinion regarding the constitutionality of DACA. SCOTUS is the ultimate authority, but they are unlikely to get to weigh in.
    Congress has, so far, been unsuccessful in passing legislation that reforms the structure of laws controlling immigration. My optimism may be misplaced, but with an election year coming up, and a deadline for close to 800,000 Dreamers looming, there is a chance that a focused effort to address this class of illegal immigrants is possible. This will require bi-partisan support.
    Outside of Whitetopia, there appears to be recognition that the Dreamers are a special case in the immigration debate. Let’s hope that our dysfunctional Congress can get its act together.

    • bikeandfish September 6, 2017 at 9:47 am

      I have a similar hope that I am willing to accept may be displaced in the long run. I think its helpful that Trump has no coalition control of Congress and is clearly lacking any party control this year. The House passed a version of their bill in the past under Republican control while it was fillibustered in the Senate by Republicans. I have hope that won’t happen again.

      Can the VP participate in fillibusters in the Senate? I actually have to admit less familiarity with his role and limitations outside tie breaking votes.

  • tenx September 6, 2017 at 10:08 am

    These “Dreamers” are not immigrants. Please use the proper description which is a migrant.

  • Henry September 6, 2017 at 11:48 am

    “In 2010 Congress declined to enact the DREAM Act, which would have bestowed lawful resident status on illegal aliens who had arrived in this country as minors.

    In September 2011, when pressured by illegal alien advocates to implement the DREAM Act ‘on his own’, President Obama responded: ‘I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true.’

    In June 2012, the president did what nine months before he had insisted he could not do, unilaterally instituting the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (‘DACA’)…”

    https://cis.org/President-Obamas-Deferred-Action-Program-Illegal-Aliens-Plainly-Unconstitutional

    • bikeandfish September 6, 2017 at 12:58 pm

      The site you referenced cherry picked quotes.

      1) They quote that the President said “In September 2011, when pressured by illegal alien advocates to implement the DREAM Act ‘on his own’, President Obama responded: ‘I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true.”

      The full quote was:

      “THE PRESIDENT: I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true. We are doing everything we can administratively. But the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce. And I think there’s been a great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetrating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things. It’s just not true.

      Now, what we can do is to prioritize enforcement, since there are limited enforcement resources, and say we’re not going to go chasing after this young man or anybody else who’s been acting responsibly and would otherwise qualify for legal status if the DREAM Act passed. ”

      His comment completely align with DACA and its discretionary enforcement of existing law. He didn’t change law.

      https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/28/remarks-president-open-questions-roundtable

      Cherry Pick: suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.

      2) The second quote was also taken out of context. The heckler clearly and expressly asked for presidential action on all 11 million undocumented immigrants. DACA did not provide amnesty nor di Obama provide protections for all 11 million people the person was yelling about. You can watch the video in the article citation in the link you provided.

      • Henry September 6, 2017 at 1:26 pm

        Get lost troll. Here’s the same Obama quote (and others) from a New York Times article:

        http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/18/constitutional-limits-of%20presidential-action-on-immigration-12/obamas-own-words-refute-his-stand-on-immigration-authority

        • Henry September 6, 2017 at 5:22 pm

          Note the background of the author of both articles:

          “teaches immigration law, citizenship law, and tax law at Temple University Law School in Philadelphia, where he joined the faculty in 1977. He served as Assistant Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the U.S. Department of Justice from 1990 to 1993. He is a graduate of Oberlin College and Harvard Law School, and received a graduate degree in Asian Studies at the East-West Center of the University of Hawaii.”

          I think he is much better qualified to discuss immigration issues than any of us commenters.

        • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 8:15 am

          Both are the same quote I provided full context for. He cherry picked it both times to prove a point that is invalid. He skipped the point about enforcement discretion because it shows Obama was being consistent.

          He may be a lawyer in immigration law but that doesn’t mean he can misrepresent anyone’s words through cherry-picking. In this case the author is a liar and intellectually dishonest.

          You keep calling me a troll and telling me to go but then engage me with links. The name calling clearly doesn’t work and I will continue to fact check the information you provide.

          • Henry September 7, 2017 at 10:22 am

            “Both”? The NY Times article contained five different quotes. RME

            Spin: To manipulate or slant news and information, in order to affect its interpretation and influence public opinion. Often employed by individuals with underlying political or personal agendas, while claiming that they are objective.

        • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 12:26 pm

          Henry,

          You lack fundamental understanding of reasoned discourse. You provided two links to the same quote which is what I was referring two. The author cherry picked part of the quote in both publications. He is the one employing fallacious techniques and should not be trusted as a source as he has tried to paint Obama’s words as inconsistent with his actions. You can disagree with DACA, as I did because of exactly did because it was inherently vulnerable to being revoked, but that is different than spreading mistruths.

          I haven’t checked the other quotes and do not have the time. No spin, never claimed to have checked the others. Your initial contribution was a quote that has been proven wrong and now you are trying to move the goalpost, another fallacy.

          You are now engaging in intellectual dishonesty.

          • Henry September 7, 2017 at 1:49 pm

            Posting on the St George News is obviously a full-time job for you. You first appeared here in mid-August.

            You comment an average of 40-60 times per day, with each comment between 300 to 1,000+ words. Do you get paid by-the-post or by-the-word?

          • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 3:12 pm

            Well at least you are honest about only caring about trolling now. Not going to even disguise it.

          • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 3:14 pm

            Funny thing is you only had to admit your first post here was a fallacious one by the linked author. I have made mistakes here in the multiple posts you have tried to disparage and owned it. But glad to see that you have taken the time to read my numerous posts. Granted, you are clearly deal in hyperbole.

          • Henry September 7, 2017 at 4:47 pm

            Nice deflections; you clearly really are a troll.

            Troll: one who makes deliberately provocative or disingenuous on-line posts, with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response.

            “You have taken the time to read my numerous posts.” ROFLMAO. After the first couple times, NO ONE reads your rambling diatribes that obfuscate issues, ignore contrary facts, and manipulate data to justify your points. All you’re doing is sucking the oxygen out of the room with your barrage of verbose posts.

          • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 7:06 pm

            Interesting and ironic. So let me get this right, fact checking and holding people accountable to basic rules of reasonable public conversation is trolling now? But actually making unsupported accusations and engaging in name calling isn’t? Huh…

            I am a forum moderator, I know what trolling looks like. Being consistent and persistent with you isn’t trolling. Expecting you to support your claims and accusations isn’t trolling. Pointing out the logical fallacies you use isn’t trolling.

            And manipulating data and obfuscating? Ha, that coming from the individual who won’t even admit they used a flawed quote and tried to move the goal post? Too funny.

            You are right about verbose. Never figured out a way to counter all of the misinformation on these forums without going into detail. Never expect those who most commonly post on these sites to actually take the time to read the citations used to fact check them. Just really tired of these forums becoming rampant places of racism (NickDanger), extreme partisanship and outright false information (like ladybug below). Our politics are already too defined by hyperpartisan echo chambers to allow another local news site to be claimed by that behavior.

          • Henry September 7, 2017 at 10:08 pm

            Your “fact checking and holding people accountable” is citing information incorrectly or out of context, to support your own views. You “pointing out logical fallacies” is like Antifa (yes, the organization to which you turn a blind eye) claiming to fight fascism.

            You’re a forum moderator for what – The Nation? Or some other “hyperpartisan echo chamber” which you hypocritically claim you are combatting? At least that explains why your recent posting on the St George News is just an extension of your regular job.

            I pray that readers will recognize your apparently never-ending dissemination of misinformation and your ulterior motives.

          • bikeandfish September 8, 2017 at 7:43 am

            Curious why you think fabricating lies about someone is an effective form of interaction? Hyperbole is one thing but what you just said is some Alex Jones level stuff. Now I get paid to post?

            You continue to provide examples of post-truth politics. When confronted with cited fact you resort to ad hominem attacks. You make accusations but are never willing to support them which is ironic at best given you complaining about misrepresenting citations (i haven’t).
            You constantly are fascinated with inserting unrelated things like Antifa (who I have condemned openly when they are the subject) which seems to be a mechanism to deflect from implications of the topic at hand.

            But you get the point and already know all of this.

          • Henry September 8, 2017 at 9:34 am

            I give you credit. You are amazingly dogged in targeting those who don’t align with your particular views. You respond to contrary ideas and facts by either just ignoring them or countering them with biased or out-of-context data and proclaiming victory. Your passive-aggressive approach is always framed by a sanctimonious proclamation of your altruistic motives.

            By the number and length of your posts, you are a troll – either paid or unpaid. I’m starting to think the latter, which is more insidious. You stated that don’t want “to allow another local news site to be claimed”. You’ve made it your personal mission to cleanse St George News of comments which don’t align with your views. You are running roughshod over most opposing commenters, who don’t have the time or patience to respond to the sheer volume of your comebacks. The eventual losers from your campaign will be the readers of the St George News.

          • bikeandfish September 8, 2017 at 10:13 am

            Can you support your claim that I fact checked your quote out of context in this thread? If so, please do. I would love to know how using the the full quote to expose how an immigration pundit cherry picked Obama is a misreprentation. Maybe for once you can support your wild accusations.

          • Henry September 8, 2017 at 11:11 am

            You incessantly keep repeating the same Iines in all your comments, after people have refuted your claims. Effective strategy to wear down your opposition.

            So you have an obsesssive need to have the last word? Okay troll – you’re it.

          • bikeandfish September 8, 2017 at 12:43 pm

            You never refuted my claim, you just tried to add a different source for the same Obama quote. Ironically, the author cherry-picked again but in a different way. You tried to make an appeal to authority but that is fallacy as it doesn’t have anything to do with the misrepresentation. I will continue to highlight you intellectual dishonesty in an open way and am the only one of the two of us to do so with support.

            Your comment about last word is ironic.

          • Henry September 8, 2017 at 12:54 pm

            You really are obsessed about getting the last word, aren’t you?

            Tag, you’re it.

      • ladybugavenger September 6, 2017 at 1:31 pm

        There may not have been an “official amnesty” but there certainly has been an “onofficial amnesty” under previous administration.

        • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 10:12 am

          The amnesty statement was about the total 11 million undocumented immigrants. There is no such thing as “unofficial amnesty”. Amnesty is a legal framework that either provides citizenship or releases an individual from punishment for illegal residency within the nation. Its provides a permanent solution. Obama did not provide that and DACA clearly didn’t: in fact, the irony of DACA is it has now made the deportation of those who participated easier as the applicants had to provide evidence of their illegal status which is normally what holds up deportation proceedings. Once their DACA status expires they are primed for deportation. DAPA did something similar but we legally challenged and revoked.

          ICE was deporting upwards of 400,000 undocumented immigrants a year under Obama, which only slowed down starting in 2013 when the rate of illegal immigration started slowing down. Obama also increased ICE focus on removal of illegal aliens who were convicted of criminal activity.

          https://www.ice.gov/removal-statistics/2016

          The same trend is true for DHS deportations:

          http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-deportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/

          There are alot of misconceptions about Obama regarding immigration but make no mistake he made huge strides to curtail the problem of undocumented immigration with an exceptional focus on criminals. His rate of deportation was record breaking.

          • ladybugavenger September 7, 2017 at 12:35 pm

            I believe sanctuary cities qualify as unofficial amnesty. And yes, your google search will not give you information on unofficial amnesty duhhhhhh.

          • ladybugavenger September 7, 2017 at 12:39 pm

            I come up with this brilliant $&!@ on my own. It hasn’t made it to google.

        • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 2:06 pm

          Except Obama has no say on sanctuary cities or states. That is up to state and municipal governments. Neither of those have the authority to deport, that in only the federal government. Its a flawed argument.

          I didn’t provide google links but actual links to PEW and ICE. They are summaries of research and government data. The standard you try to enforce is unreasonable. Its great that you have ideas about immigration but when interacting in public you are expected to support your claims. A personal opinion that doesn’t align with verified fact has no value.

          Amnesty has a very real meaning which you are ignoring. You also fail to support your ideas. Your current strategy is the epitome of “post-truth” politics.

          • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 2:39 pm

            *no value or merit in public discussions

          • ladybugavenger September 7, 2017 at 4:29 pm

            He actually did have a say just like Trump has a say and says let’s get rid of them.

            I know what amnesty means. I know what it means when a witness in court is granted amnesty to testify against a defendant.
            b&f I must admit, j stopped reading your google comments.

          • ladybugavenger September 7, 2017 at 4:54 pm

            I’m closer to this illegal immigration topic than you know. I’m closer to the parents coming over here illegally and bringing their children over then you know. 15 years and still illegal. Perhaps you’ve missed my comments that my twin granbaby girls father is a dreamer. He was 16, my daughter 15. He’s not on birth certificate. Dream on! He wouldn’t accept my help to get legal. He would rather have his fake citizen card and fake SS#….me being pissed off was an under statement. He is married to a Mexican us citizen now and he appears to be a good father. But shoot! if I had fake documents and a fake citizen card I would go to prison.

            #dreamondreamersidontcareifyougetdeported
            #getlegalfelons

          • ladybugavenger September 7, 2017 at 4:55 pm

            Correction: 15 years and still illegal

          • ladybugavenger September 7, 2017 at 5:10 pm

            The only reason he’s not on birth certificate is because wasn’t old enough to legally sign it and his parents were in another state so they couldn’t sign it either.

            Whoa! Isn’t that ironic he’s not legally in this country and yet he couldn’t sign a document because he wasn’t old enough to legally do so. Take that to your legal class and analyze it.

          • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 6:46 pm

            I am fully aware you are unlikely to read cited fact. You have stated as much. I mostly post so others reading along don’t think misinformation is true. Having run forums as a moderator its fair to say there are normally at least ten times as many people that lurk than comment. I do it so those people who are trying to learn have solid information.

          • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 6:55 pm

            PS….Obama did prioritize deportation and actually more so than Trump. From taking office until June 30th Trump has deported 84,473 individuals or 16,900 per month. Obama deported 20,000 per month in 2016 for a total of 240,255. In 2012 he deported an average of 34,000 people a month. If I remember right, that was more than any other president in history.

            Per sanctuary cities…..you don’t understand them. The only control the executive has is through coercion and obstruction of state powers. There is no direct control of sanctuary cities. Indirectly they can do all sorts of things to persuade states to hand over records or use state/local policing to benefit ICE, like attach funding to conditions, etc.

            If you know what amnesty means then you are being intellectually dishonest in your use of “unofficial amnesty”. Obama did no such thing as there is no such thing. Heck, even sanctuary cities can not interfere with ICE deportations; they can only refuse to hand over relevant documentation from police encounters, etc. People who claim otherwise don’t understand basic civics.

            There is a reason Obama was known as the “deporter in chief” by undocumented communities.

          • bikeandfish September 7, 2017 at 9:50 pm

            The family situation you describe sounds awkward and I can sympathize with both sides. It can be difficult to understand how someone who has a hand reaching out them can turn it down and remain illegal. I can imagine that is hard for your daughter and will be for your grand daughter at some point. On the other hand, the way we frame and criminalize undocumented immigrants actually undermines trust in government authority. That is the principle reason sanctuary cities exist, ie increase bond with undocumented residents to develop trust and decrease cost (financial and social) of traditional behaviors you describe. Its why eliminating birth right citizenship is noted to increase criminality and cycles of poverty. Hard to know until you have experienced what its like to have your entire existence labeled “illegal” and have so many government and social forces that make survival tenuous. Its a cat and mouse game that provides little to no incentive to intentionally provide evidence of illegal status, a requirement of DACA. In fact, many immigration specialist warned Dreamers to be careful for this very reason. Unilateral policies like DACA are inherently more vulnerable and fickle then legislation. And now, the agency in charge of DACA has all of the evidence from applicants to expedite deportation (compared to the often difficult task of proof required of the average undocumented immigrant). The double edged sword of DACA is going to start cutting deep in about 6 months. How many of those currently under DACA do you think are going to reapply when they know how that information can be legally used? What portion do you think will disappear into the wind?

            I have no clue what I would do in that position. My entire life I have been a law abiding citizen but I also never had a need to migrate. I never experience debilitating poverty, crime or government corruption to the point of needing to travel long distances to cross into another country without legal status. I have never been systematically persecuted or watched generations of family harmed by such. I hope never to be faced with those dilemmas but they are issues I keep in perspective at moments like this.

            We all have life experiences that inform us differently.

          • ladybugavenger September 8, 2017 at 9:39 am

            Your right I don’t read cited facts because I don’t believe they are facts. I studied law and I have been involved in the legal system and let me tell you, facts are blurred, testimonies are manipulated, and the law is interpreted differently and therefore also manipulated.

            You’re right b&f I don’t read Washington post or any other cite as fact.

            You are just a google search arguing google news.

            I don’t believe you have always been law abiding. I believe you didn’t get caught going over the speed limit, not using your blinker, crossing over the double yellow line or stealing (taking without permission) that pen that ended up in your hand of a paper clip from your work ( for example-unintentionally I will add but it’s still stealing)

          • ladybugavenger September 8, 2017 at 9:51 am

            One more thing- innocent people get convicted and guilty people get acquitted all based on “facts”

            So take the facts that you read and smoke them.

            What do I believe? The Bible. It’s playing out right before your eyes. Who do I believe? God. Who is my savior? Jesus.

            Have a blessed day!

          • ladybugavenger September 8, 2017 at 10:19 am

            b&f the next time you are in a 35MPH zone and you look down at your speedometer and it reads 37MPH. Remember one thing- you have broken the law.

            That’s why Jesus came here to save us because on our own we can’t follow the law. Hearts are corrupted. You can’t even see you have broken the law and therefore “law abiding” is a lie. You just haven’t got caught. We can’t follow the 10 commandments on our own. Thank God for Jesus!

            When you have people rising up for same sex marriage- when the Bible clearly states that marriage is between a man & a women then you know this world has gone mad. You know that people are saying right is wrong and wrong is right. But of course, as an unbeliever of the one true living God it all seams right, civilly. But God says it’s wrong. Thank God for Jesus because clearly they have until their last breath to accept his salvation. And whoa to those that don’t.

            I don’t interfere with people’s choice unless they are my children then it’s total interference.

            One day all will see.

            I have total value and merit in public discussions b&f.

            Hi Theone! ❤️

            Christmas is coming so save your delusional and believing a fairytale comments for the people celebrating Santa lol you know you love me Theone-back at ya!

          • bikeandfish September 8, 2017 at 10:39 am

            I am going to guess from your statement that the fact that you only “studied law” doesn’t mean you are a lawyer. Correct me I am wrong there. What level of certification do you have?

            You are free to trust the Bible. That is your perogative. More power to you. But its inherently faith based, not fact. They are two different things. One can be verified the other inherently can’t. There is no conversation to be had about fact other than to state an opinion about your own belief.

            It’s a shame you so consistently weaponize skepticism. Its a powerful and important tool in law and science. Comparing legal language and various interpretations to emperical facts like immigration statistics is an irrational approach. You are right about law and I am sure you have experience to justify your pessimistic approach. But that doesn’t mean your blanket disapproval of “googling” facts has any merit. Its a tool like any other that came before it. Meaning a person has to use tools of skepticism to filter out misinformation from fact. But we have the tools for that which are ignoring. The WaPo data can’t be discarded simply because you buy into fake news paranoia anymore than facts cited by Fox or Breitbart are inherently wrong because of the messenger.

            Your criticism of my law abiding comment uses an impossible standard. You know the intent and merit of the statement. By your standard there is no such thing as law abiding, just like your statements about intellectual honesty. Its an application of the reductio ad absurdum fallacy.

          • ladybugavenger September 8, 2017 at 10:44 am

            And my grand babies father never applied for DACA- he has fake citizenship card. Therefore, he looks like a citizen.

            All those things you say have never happened to you, have happened to me in this country (I didn’t leave the country but I left la county so the corruption against me would stop, 130 pages to FBI documenting what we were going through-so it would be real obvious if they crossed over to Oklahoma) I suppose I have more experience than you of how things really are.

            My husband is Native American so he will “tell all of us to shut up and quit your crying- immigration started in 1492- that’s when genocide started and in 2017 I’m still going to court to get my land back. Have you read about the cobell lawsuit?”

            Hmmmmmm “The gov’t “lost” (shredded) the documents. Talk about injustice. Everyone quit crying.”

          • ladybugavenger September 8, 2017 at 10:46 am

            Correction ” illegal immigration started in 1492″ so why not rally for the native Americans instead of the dreamers

          • ladybugavenger September 8, 2017 at 10:57 am

            We were in la county being tormented by government corruption,fighting the good fight. Then we went to Utah to escape it (FBI said, have you thought about moving? I said, have they thought about stopping?) Well, it didn’t take long to pack up our stuff and go to st George. Did it stop? Not right away, I lived in paranoia for 4 years. Now I’m in Oklahoma. Did it stop? Idk I once was told I will always be watched. Am I paranoid? Not often. I know whoever is watching me has seen the truth.

            You gonna find that on google search? But it is a fact.

      • bikeandfish September 6, 2017 at 2:02 pm

        Oops, #2 refers to a quote you did not cite. Sorry for confusion.

  • commonsense September 6, 2017 at 1:26 pm

    The Mormon Church has a self-interest in this matter. Many converts are from Latin America, some are in the US undocumented. Gathering to the chosen land is scriptural. To throw baptized illegals out would reflect badly on the missionary effort and the gathering to receive the second coming. Expect Utah’s congressional delegation to listen to the Church.

    Remember the LDS Church is global, Trump’s vision is not. America first. So, expect conflict of interest.

  • ladybugavenger September 8, 2017 at 10:01 pm

    I finally know where you stand b&f.

    You stand with the unbelievers. You don’t believe in Jesus.

    Everything I have said is from experience. What I have witnessed. What I have seen with my own eyes.

    Everything you have said is based on someone else’s statistics, opinions, researches.

    A blind man can’t see the sun but he can feel it on his skin. You can’t see God but one day you will acknowledge that you feel Him.

    You see one day we will all die. We have a choice now to accept what Jesus did on the cross for us. After we die there is no choice. I was once like you, I could not see, I was blind. But now I see the one true living God. And that’s all that matters in this life.

Leave a Reply