Archive for Monday, September 4, 2017

Trump expected to end program for young ‘Dreamers’

President Donald Trump speaks to the media in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York, Tuesday, Aug. 15, 2017. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

President Donald Trump speaks to the media in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York, Tuesday, Aug. 15, 2017. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

September 4, 2017


WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is expected to announce that he will end protections for young immigrants who were brought into the country illegally as children, but with a six-month delay, people familiar with the plans said.

The delay in the formal dismantling of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA program, would be intended to give Congress time to decide whether it wants to address the status of the so-called Dreamers legislation, according to two people familiar with the president's thinking. But it was not immediately clear how the six-month delay would work in practice and what would happen to people who currently have work permits under the program, or whose permits expire during the six-month stretch.

It also was unclear exactly what would happen if Congress failed to pass a measure by the considered deadline, they said. The two spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter ahead of a planned Tuesday announcement.

The president, who has been grappling with the issue for months, has been known to change his mind in the past and could still shift course. The plan was first reported by Politico Sunday evening.

Trump has been wrestling for months with what to do with the Obama-era DACA program, which has given nearly 800,000 young immigrants a reprieve from deportation and the ability to work legally in the form of two-year, renewable work permits.

The expected move would come as the White House faces a Tuesday deadline set by Republican state officials threatening to sue the Trump administration if the president did not end the program. It also would come as Trump digs in on appeals to his base as he finds himself increasingly under fire, with his poll numbers at near-record lows.

Trump had been personally torn as late as last week over how to deal with what are undoubtedly the most sympathetic immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. Many came to the U.S. as young children and have no memories of the countries they were born in.

During his campaign, Trump slammed DACA as illegal "amnesty" and vowed to eliminate the program the day he took office. But since his election, Trump has wavered on the issue, at one point telling The Associated Press that those covered could "rest easy."

Trump had been unusually candid as he wrestled with the decision in the early months of his administration. During a February press conference, he said the topic was "a very, very difficult subject for me, I will tell you. To me, it's one of the most difficult subjects I have."

"You have some absolutely incredible kids — I would say mostly," he said, adding: "I love these kids."

All the while, his administration continued to process applications and renew DACA work permits, to the dismay of immigration hard-liners.

News of the president's expected decision drew strong reactions from advocates on both sides of the issue.

"IF REPORTS ARE TRUE, Pres Trump better prepare for the civil rights fight of his admin. A clean DREAM Act is now a Nat Emergency #DefendDACA," tweeted New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez, a Democrat.

But Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican who has called DACA unconstitutional, warned that a delay in dismantling it would amount to "Republican suicide."

"Ending DACA now gives chance 2 restore Rule of Law. Delaying so R Leadership can push Amnesty is Republican suicide," he wrote.

It would be up to members of Congress to pass a measure to protect those who have been covered under the program. While there is considerable support for that among Democrats and moderate Republicans, Congress is already facing a packed fall agenda and has had a poor track record in recent years for passing immigration-related bills.

House Speaker Paul Ryan and a number of other legislators urged Trump last week to hold off on scrapping DACA to give them time to come up with a legislative fix.

"These are kids who know no other country, who are brought here by their parents and don't know another home. And so I really do believe that there needs to be a legislative solution," Ryan told Wisconsin radio station WCLO.

The Obama administration created the DACA program in 2012 as a stopgap to protect some young immigrants from deportation as they pushed unsuccessfully for a broader immigration overhaul in Congress.

The program protected people in the country illegally who could prove they arrived before they were 16, had been in the United States for several years and had not committed a crime while being here. It mimicked versions of the so-called DREAM Act, which would have provided legal status for young immigrants but was never passed by Congress.

As of July 31, 2015, more than 790,000 young immigrants had been approved under the program, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

The House under Democratic control passed a Dream Act in 2010 but it died in the Senate. Since Republicans retook control of the House in late 2010, it has taken an increasingly hard line on immigration. House Republicans refused to act on the Senate's comprehensive immigration bill in 2013. Two years later, a GOP border security bill languished because of objections from conservatives.

Many House Republicans represent highly conservative districts. The primary upset of the former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor to a conservative challenger in 2014 in a campaign that cast him as soft on illegal immigration convinced many House Republicans that pro-immigrant stances could cost them politically.

So despite Ryan's personal commitment on the issue and his comments in favor of the young immigrants, action to protect them may be unlikely in the House — absent intense lobbying from Trump.


Bob Smith 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Here's the weakness of ruling by decree. What one President does, the next President can undo.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

It is the right decision. There is no basis in law for DACA, and we must adhere to the laws on the books. Obama, especially when he had control of Congress, should have created legislation to address the situation.

Executive orders must be used only to carry out law, not create law.

Understand this will create hardship on this group of illegal immigrants, but they won't be the first nor the last to suffer because of their parents' crimes.

Congress will have 6 months to come up with a legal solution.

Richard Aronoff 9 months, 3 weeks ago

"Illegal Immigrant" implies a violation of criminal law. That's not the case. Being here without documentation is a violation of civil law.

But what if it was a violation of criminal law. To convict one would have to show a mens rea. I don't think that the vast majority of children had any idea they were doing anything wrong when their parents brought them here.

Now, Congress has an opportunity to do what they should have done in the first place. It will be interesting to see who opposes a solution.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Nonsense. Illegal immigrant simply means the person did not come here legally.

And while not all who are here illegally violated a criminal law many have. According to the most trusted name in news, CNN, it is a violation of federal law to enter the country without the approval of an immigration officer.

Where in the law does it show you have to prove intent? Not all crimes require intent.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Should be more precise - illegal immigration men's a person is not here legally - came without going through immigration or overstayed visa, etc.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Question I have is where of the parents? Are they still here? If so why? And why don't they step up and take responsibility for the mess they created for their children?

Here is my solution. End DACA except, those already here can stay until they are 21, until they finish college, or if currently seeking citizenship, until their case is decided.

The parents must never be allowed citizenship nor granted a visa. Penalty for contributing to this problem.

No reason they can't go back to the country of their national origin. People immigrate to different countries all the time.

Fred Whitehead Jr. 9 months, 3 weeks ago

What amazes and disturbs me the very most is the lack of any shred of decency and civility in some of the posters that is mirrored in the mean spirited attitude of the President of the United States. Visiting the crimes of the parents on the children is vicious, horrible, un-American and down right disgusting. As are the attitudes of some of the folks posting on this site.

"And while not all who are here illegally violated a criminal law many have." documentation??

(DACA folks as opposed to home grown criminals??)

I am curious, Brock......How does all this gore your ox??

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

A parent breaks in and steals money from you and gives it to their child. They are caught - do you say, aw heck I won't punish the kid by taking the money from them?

The parents don't pay their mortgage - should the bank say we heck, we don't want to punish the kids by repossessing the house, ya'll just keep it.

Kids, unfortunately must bear the consequences of their parents criminal actions and their poor choices. No one is visiting the crimes of the parents on the children, the children themselves though not through their fault are here in violation of our laws.

Why don't you adopt some of these kids? There is a solution.

Fred Whitehead Jr. 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Brock.......Brock........the children are not thrown in jail. .

And the parents AND the children will be out of the house and in the community shelter.

Get over it.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

And the dreamers will not be thrown in jail. They will go home to their parents home or to relatives.

Why enforce one set of laws that negatively impacts children for their parents actions but not others? Right, because like most issues today because it is political.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

It gores my ox because I support enforcing the laws of our nation, many illegal immigrants cost taxpayers money - the taxes they pay do not offset the cost of services they receive, some commit crimes that would not be committed if they were not here, and without strong borders and immigration enforcement we are at risk for infectious disease outbreaks and terrorist acts.

Larry Sturm 9 months, 3 weeks ago

While we are at Trumps wife came here illegally why don't we deport her too and charge Trump for aiding and abetting.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Proof? If she is here illegally I'd support deporting her too.

A quick search proves she is here legally and came here legally. From a democratic lawyer...

Michael Wildes was not Melania Trump’s original immigration lawyer, but “when a question arose as to whether she had worked without the proper visa, I was brought in to review the documents and clarify that she was in full compliance,” Mr. Wildes said. “She has been beyond reproach.”

As the open letter he wrote detailed, Mr. Wildes said that Ms. Trump first came to the United States on a B-1/B-2 visitor visa in 1996, and obtained the first of a series of yearlong H-1B visas later that year. She was issued a self-sponsored green card “based on her extraordinary ability” in 2001, he continued. (Donald Trump and Melania Knauss were married in 2004.) “There is no doubt that she is highly accomplished,” Mr. Wildes said. “She has been associated with some of the biggest ad campaigns in the world, and she was highly remunerated.”

Richard Aronoff 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Well, based on the comment and the five "likes" there are at least six people who are members of the "if it's on the Internet it must be true" club.

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 9 months, 3 weeks ago

We could present truth that Melania came in illegally, but his supporters would be okay with it. Remember Trump could shoot someone and his supporters would still love him.

Bob Smith 9 months, 3 weeks ago

How long is LJW going to keep editorializing in the news by continuing to use an unflattering photo of the President from the middle of August?

Fred Whitehead Jr. 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Unflattering photograph??????? What?????????is that the ONLY thing you can think of??

My God.......did you lose the photo with the swastika armband?? Let's use THAT one.

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 9 months, 3 weeks ago

This just shows the shallowness of people who would vote for a reality tv star.

Richard Aronoff 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Brock: learn the difference between criminal law and civil law and then get back to me. While you're at it, learn what "mens rea" means.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Richard, it is you that needs to do some research. It is a criminal violation to come here without going through an immigration official and it is civil when they do, but overstay their visa.

Mens era means having intent or knowledge of wrongdoing. Granted the children didn't have intent or knowledge but not all laws require it - remember the old cliche, ignorance of the law is no excuse? I looked at the law and see nothing that requires intent.

You remind me of Comey saying that Hillary didn't have intent so she wasn't guilty when intent didn't matter.

Michael Kort 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Well, many of these children are now grown individuals who have jobs and pay Taxes as well as Social Security and Medicare and contribute billions of dollars yearly to our governments bank accounts........and they serve in our military.......and the tooth fairy is going to replace all of that income ? ? ?

Gee,........what are they reporting in Dumbart ?

So, once you deport them they will not be paying Taxes, or for the Social Security and Medicare of those who will grow old before them or the costs of two wars ( and we are heading towards a third and possibly nuclear war with North Koreas' mad man ) and none of that will be free of $ COST .

Of course their payments to our government can be replaced by YOUR PAYMENTS that will no doubt cost you more or made up thru the degrading of your future services ( the wages of biggotry are going to come home to all of us one way or the other here )

By the way.......true to form Donald Trump has said nothing of giving them a $ refund of their already paid in Social Security and Medicare Payments because Donald is a rip off artist at heart !

The money that these people pay in taxes yearly could pay for Hurricane Harvey's aftermath.......getting rid of them ?......great timing ! you understand how Donald has been into bankruptcy so many times and had a listed stock that went from $ 44 to $ 0 .

Welcome to the club of banks and their depositors, bond holders, share holders, contractors, etc.......because we all are about to be DONALDED ! ! !

Michael Kort 9 months, 3 weeks ago

If you are worried about infectious diseases coming into this country all you need to do is close the borders to all incoming or returning tourists ( and no outbound tourists ) by the millions, kill the airlines and tourist industries, no more cruise boats or carribian tours.......unemployment for going to Cabo on spring break and hold every incoming container of trade until it can be throughly hand moved bit by bit and disinfected box by box .

The deadly so called " Spanish Influenza " of WW1 actually was traced back to Ft. RIley Ks and killed millions world wide thanks to us .

Maybe the world should ban Americans from travel abroad to their countries ? It could happen again ?

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Well it isn't just me, but our government too. Immigrants and refugees are required to have a medical examine and can be denied entry based on it.

Either our government is wasting time and money doing these exams or there is a risk.

Marc Wilborn 9 months, 3 weeks ago

First reported case was at Fort Riley, not the source which is attributed to several other more reliable ideas such as mutation from pigs at front lines, etc.

Marc Wilborn 9 months, 3 weeks ago

"We" did not start the Spanish Flu at Fort Riley. It is the location of the first appearance which is logical as the flu actually started in France. The actual source cannot be pin pointed with certainty.

Kyle Neuer 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Get ready to pay more for a bunch of ag products. Stuff's rotting in the fields in CA due to a lack of farm workers. But thank heaven we can get rid of those kids that wanted a decent life. Must be more of that "compassionate conservatism" we heard so much about. Christian values in action.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Are you suggesting we let the DACAs stay so they can do farm work and we can have lower prices?

Of course you don't, but that is the danger of just throwing out talking points.

The DACAs are here in violation of immigration law. What is the point of having laws if we don't enforce them? If the law is bad then change it.

Congress has had ample time to change it. Our country is based on representation of the people and not ruling by decree which is exactly what using an executive order to create law is.

Armen Kurdian 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Call me crazy, that sounds a little racist.

Richard Aronoff 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Brock: There are two aspects to so-called illegal immigration. Improper entry is a crime. Unlawful presence is not a crime it is a civil offense.

The parents of dreamers are guilty of improper entry which can result in a fine and incarceration. The children of those adults are guilty of nothing more than unlawful presence. Under civil law, they may be deported.

The 5th circuit said DACA was unconstitutional. That decision was upheld.

Obama's attitude regarding the constitution was expressed during an interview with NPR when he was a senator. He said the problem with the constitution is that it tells the government what it CAN'T do. Thus, his "pen and phone" method of legislating from the oval office. Woodrow Wilson was of the same opinion.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

Richard, here is an excerpt from the law. I could be wrong, but sure seems like they are in violation of it. Did they not enter the US at a time or place designated by immigration officers? Nope, so they violated the criminal law. But I'm open to your point of view.

Regardless, no one is suggesting anything more than deporting them so criminal or civil the penalty will be the same.

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

Doug Larson 9 months, 3 weeks ago

It's not the childrens fault that their parents broke the law. This is like arresting a child because the parents were dealing drugs in the house. Just because they were with the parents doesn't make them criminals. They are innocent bystanders.

Brock Masters 9 months, 3 weeks ago

You're right it is not the children's fault their parents broke the law, but just like in your drug dealing analogy the children have to suffer the consequences.

Often the government seizes the assets of drug dealers which mean the children will be kicked out of the only home they may have known, they may not be able to use the cars their parents bought with drug money and they may suffer the loss of their parents when the parents are sent to prison.

Bad things happen to children when their parents violate laws. It is sad, but blame the parents.

Greg Cooper 9 months, 1 week ago

Pretty bad analogy, in my opinion. The children of drug dealers will be placed in protective custody in the short term, and/or long term guardianship. Children of criminals are not treated as criminals or as accessories to crime but as victims of neglect and abuse. To say that the children of illegal immigrants should suffer the same fate, deportation, as the parents is cruel punishment indeed. Too, to argue that those kids should be deported treats them as if they had consciously made the decision to stay here. Until the age of majority, most decisions to be made for children are deemed to be made by the adults nominally in charge of the kids. So, the argument that the kids should deported rests the false premise that the kids made the decision to stay in this country.

Armen Kurdian 9 months, 3 weeks ago

So maybe someone can be the first one on this post to say, Congress, do your job and pass some immigration reform? Are you lefties really saying you wanted these DACA folks to live their whole lives without legal status under the so-called protection of a flimsy EO?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.