Updated Trump administration ends DACA, with 6-month delay 07/10/2018

The Trump administration on Tuesday announced the “orderly wind down” of the Obama-era program that gave a deportation reprieve to illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children – putting pressure on Congress to come up with a legislative alternative.

The Department of Homeland Security formally rescinded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA, with a six-month delay for current recipients. According to Acting Homeland Security Secretary Elaine Duke, the interval is meant to give Congress “time to deliver on appropriate legislative solutions.”

“However, I want to be clear that no new initial requests or associated applications filed after today will be acted on,” Duke said in a written statement.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions, speaking to reporters, blasted the Obama administration's "disrespect for the legislative process" in enacting the 2012 policy. He said the “unilateral executive amnesty” probably would have been blocked by the courts anyway.

“The executive branch, through DACA, deliberately sought to achieve what the legislative branch specifically refused to authorize on multiple occasions,” Sessions said, blaming the policy for the recent “surge” at the border. “Such an open-ended circumvention of immigration laws was an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the executive branch.”

A day earlier, Sessions sent Duke a letter with his legal determination that the 2012 executive action was unconstitutional.

The Trump administration was facing a Tuesday deadline to make a decision on DACA or face legal action by Republican state AGs who hoped to force the president’s hand in discontinuing the program.

Administration officials cast their approach Tuesday at the least disruptive option.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump had promised to terminate DACA, though he appeared to soften his stance since taking office. In ending the program with a six-month delay, Trump put the onus on Congress to pass a legislative fix.

According to DHS, no current beneficiaries will be impacted before March 5, 2018.

“Congress, get ready to do your job - DACA!” Trump tweeted Tuesday morning.


In this Aug. 15, 2017, file photo, a woman holds up a signs in support of the Obama administration program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, during an immigration reform rally at the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File)

While some Republicans support the goals of the DACA program, many opposed the use of executive action to institute it, describing the move as a presidential overreach.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is among those who now supports the call to protect so-called “Dreamers” with legislation.

“I have always believed DACA was a presidential overreach,” he said in a statement. "However, I equally understand the plight of the Dream Act kids who -- for all practical purposes know no country other than America. If President Trump makes this decision we will work to find a legislative solution to their dilemma.”

On a conference call, administration officials said Tuesday they are still prioritizing criminal aliens for deportation. But they described the original DACA criteria as very broad and cited the legal determination of the Justice Department.

During the presidential campaign, Trump referred to DACA as “illegal amnesty.” However, he seemed to edge away from that stance in April when he told the Associated Press that DACA recipients could “rest easy.”

The DACA program was formed through executive action by former President Barack Obama in 2012, allowing recipients to get a deportation reprieve – and work permits – for a two-year period subject to renewal. Under the program, individuals were able to request DACA status if they were under the age of 31 on June 15, 2012, came to the U.S. before turning 16 and have continuously lived in the country since June 15, 2007. Individuals must also have a high school diploma, GED certification, been honorably discharged from the military or still be in school. Recipients cannot have a criminal record.

Congress had been considering legislation to shield young illegal immigrants from deportation for years, dating back to the George W. Bush administration. Lawmakers tried again to pass a bill during the Obama administration, but couldn’t muster the votes amid flagging Republican support before Obama formed the program in 2012.

Nearly 800,000 undocumented youth are currently under the program's umbrella.

On Friday, House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said he supported a legislative solution to protect undocumented minors, but also urged the president to reconsider scrapping DACA.

"I actually don't think he should do that and I believe that this is something that Congress has to fix," Ryan said on radio station WCLO.


Views: 2630

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Jerry Brown has California reeling on the edge of Bankruptcy and his minions call him the best thing since Sliced Bread. IF he did anything mentally Sound, good, right or  just it would be something, but HE IS incapable of such a task!

Brown needs a chum bucket chained to his waste and then drop him off 5O miles out in the Pacific... Along with his entire legislature at his side--They are in totality a Joke to this nation politically and Morally. 

They care nothing about citizen of this country and everything about non citizens as they plot a dangerous  course here in California. GET RID OF THIS DEMOCRAT SCOURGE RUNNING OUR STATE. WE ARE BEING FORCED TO LIVE UNDER SUCH MENTALLY DEPRAVED CRETINS IN WHAT ONCE WAS THE GREAT STATE OF CALIFORNIA.






Trump offers to triple Obama’s amnesty number in exchange for tougher security laws

Generous legalization is trade for wall, more deportations

President Trump will propose a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million illegal immigrant Dreamers, nearly tripling the Obama-era DACA program, the White House said Thursday.

Mr. Trump’s vision, which he will submit to Congress next week, would grant legal status to fewer than the 3 million people under the plan Senate Democrats have backed. But the number of people is far higher than the 690,000 in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

White House officials said they felt they had to go that far in order to demand major changes on the security side, including an end to catch-and-release of illegal immigrants snared at the border, faster deportations for those caught overstaying their visas inside the U.S. and $25 billion for Mr. Trump’s wall.

The president also will demand strict limits on the chain of family migration across the board — not just for newly legalized Dreamers.

He would allow immigrants to petition for spouses and minor children but would eliminate parents, siblings and adult children from chain migration. Extended family already in the backlog would be allowed to enter, but no further applications would be accepted.

The combination of legalization and security puts Mr. Trump squarely in the middle of the immigration debate, between Democrats who want a more generous amnesty and House Republicans who opposed citizenship and were instead pushing a massive package of security changes.

“As part of this effort to ensure there is full bipartisan support for this package, we believe the total number that will be able to apply for legal status … will be a population of individuals of 1.8 million people,” a senior White House official said.

The official said Mr. Trump wouldn’t agree to a deal on Dreamers without the border security, enforcement and policy changes.

“This is kind of a bottom line for the president,” another official told reporters at the White House.

The plan calls for a $25 billion trust fund to build Mr. Trump’s border wall and other infrastructure. That would ensure a future Congress couldn’t withhold the money.

Mr. Obama supported a path to citizenship for Dreamers but was unable to get that legislation through Congress, which was why his administration circumvented Capitol Hill to create the DACA program.

Begun in 2012, the program approved some 800,000 people for renewable two-year permits granting them a stay of deportation and authority to work in the U.S. Of those people, some 690,000 were still protected under DACA as of late last year.

Of the additional 1.1 million people Mr. Trump would enroll, about 600,000 were eligible for DACA but, for various reasons, didn’t apply, and 500,000 or so who would be admitted under adjusted timelines.

The White House called the 1.8 million “a dramatic concession by the White House to get to 60 votes in the Senate.”

It would take the immigrants 10 to 12 years to earn citizenship.

Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican, said the president had embraced an amnesty that even President Obama was denied.

“I do not believe we should be granting a path to citizenship to anybody here illegally,” he said. “All of these proposals being floated that have a path to citizenship for DACA recipients are markedly to the left of where President Obama was. DACA itself has no path to citizenship under President Obama’s illegal executive amnesty.”

Democrats remained skeptical of Mr. Trump’s support for citizenship, which he announced to reporters on Wednesday.

“What he says on Tuesday is not necessarily what he says on Thursday,” said Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee.

Other Democrats said Mr. Trump’s calculus of a trade of Dreamers for the wall was still unacceptable.

“I do not support border wall funding,” said Sen. Cory A. Booker, New Jersey Democrat.

He said he was holding out hope that Dreamers could get citizenship without a wall.

“I’m a prisoner of hope, but that does not mean I have some Pollyannaish view that this is going to work out,” said Mr. Booker. “Hope is work, hope is sacrifice, so we are going to fight this.”

Still, Sen. Michael F. Bennet, Colorado Democrat, said the president’s move toward citizenship for Dreamers was encouraging.

“I think there is a general consensus among people working on this that a pathway has to be part of it,” he said.

The White House plan could undercut efforts by House conservatives, who back a much tougher security plan. That would grant the 690,000 people under DACA a new legal status of three-year work permits, approved by Congress, in exchange for mandatory use of E-Verify for employers to check work status, curtailing abuse of the asylum system, cracking down on sanctuary cities and punishing repeat illegal immigrants.

The White House said it envisioned Mr. Trump’s plan as the basis for Senate negotiations but expected the House to pass its own bill.

“We’re not trying to force something on the House at this point. I think the House has got its own independent process,” an adviser said.

The White House said the president’s plan would boost security at the northern border as well, which could entice senators in Montana, North Dakota and Minnesota who are calling for attention to the U.S.-Canada line.

Mr. Trump’s plan would cancel the Diversity Visa Lottery, which gives 50,000 visas per year based on chance. Those visas would be recaptured and used to reduce the backlog in merit-based migration.

The president also asked Congress to allow faster deportations for those who overstay their visitors’ visas, who could account for half of all new illegal immigration.

Mr. Trump said Congress must change the laws to help end the catch-and-release policy that applies to countries other than Mexico and Canada who cannot be quickly turned back home.

Under the current system, migrants who cannot be detained are released with the hope that they will return for their deportation hearings. They rarely do.

The White House said it had dozens of other enforcement changes it could have demanded, such as E-Verify, but it would pursue those later.

“This is the first bite,” said a White House official. “There is a second phase to this. There are 11 million people who live here illegally.”

The plan is unlikely to please activists on either side of the debate.

Indeed, immigrant rights groups were skeptical even after Mr. Trump said he would support full citizenship rights.

Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, called it “a spoonful of sugar before the bitter medicine of Trump’s far-reaching nativist agenda.”


The Trump Administration has said it will release details on Monday 01/29/2018 of its proposal to provide an amnesty for 690,000 DACA recipients. Media attention has been focused on how much funding for a border wall would be included, but it is even more important to end the visa lottery and stop chain migration.


CALL the White House at 202-456-1111 (9am-4pm, EST) and insist that any DACA deal includes cuts in immigration!

• A DACA amnesty must include ending chain migration, eliminating the visa lottery, and mandatory E-verify along with increased border security.
• In December, President Trump tweeted that a DACA deal must include an end to chain migration and the visa lottery - Tell him to honor his word!
• The new Harvard-Harris poll show that a majority of Americans want stopping chain migration and terminating the visa lottery to be part of any DACA relief.
Tell the President to keep his promises on Immigration!

Please phone the White House comment line at 202-456-1111 and tell President Trump to demand mandatory E-verify and an end to chain migration & the visa lottery. Y

You can also send a message to President Trump online


The current immigration plans being leaked by the White House staff are a repudiation of Campaign promises... No Amnesty, a focus on enforcement, building the wall, ending chain migration, and the VISA lottery are all expected.  The enforcement issues... including E Verify, quicker deportations, ending catch and release,  DO NOT require Congress to act... these items can all be initiated thru EO's and regulatory changes... using current immigration law... new laws are not necessary.

The Art of the Deal doesn't lend itself to negotiations where national security and our heritage as a euro-centric culture are concerned... This SELL OUT proposed by the President will be his end.  More BETRAYAL was not what America voted for and if this President and his advisors don't understand that ... they too can be replaced.

No AMNESTY... deport the illegals now and secure the border. The CURRENT LAWS are sufficient to this task if enforced. Go after employers and government agents (elected and appointed) who are harboring illegal aliens and breaking the existing laws... the jobs and services will dry up and the illegals will self-deport. 

Mr. President you already have the authority to build the wall... it simply needs to be funded... and that too can be done without Congress... thru the use of your regulatory authority and Presidential EO's, which allow you to increase border crossing fees and tariffs (all within the President's authority)... Financing the wall can be done with a BOND ISSUE, paid for with border crossing fees and tariffs... you don't need Congress.

NO MORE BETRAYALS... the disgraceful immigration plan being prepared in the White House and your failure to actively and aggressively drain the swamp, will result in your prompt removal in the 2020 election cycle.  Get rid of those advisors who counsel you to go against your campaign promises... and don't think about trying to REDEFINE those promises... that will simply double down on the rage building in your constituents. 

Trump offers to triple Obama’s amnesty number in exchange for tougher security laws, right, really, does this explain Sanctuary Cities planed for every state of America?

List of Sanctuary Cities: US DACA 10 Year Plan Exposed

This of course, this Government never stated that 148 Million Immigrants World Wide has the DACA Visa Cards, no hell no it don't!

DACA Sanctuary Cities Illegal Immigration To US 2001- 2018: '148 Mi...

If Trump triples Obama's Amnesty... he can look forward to joining Obama, as his base will rapidly repudiate him... dooming his presidency to become a monumental failure. 

MAGA must put America First... not illegal or legal immigration policy. Attempting to buy votes in Congress, will only result in further compromise and greater numbers of illegal aliens invading America.  Let's hope that the leaks and reports coming out of the White House are FAKE NEWS....

''  I actually don't think he should do that and I believe that this is something that Congress has to fix, "




WES...I agree............

This IS Probably the best thing that could be done.



Trump should meet with Mueller "only after" the Nunes 4 page memo is released to the public.




Congress is incapable of managing the Illegal Alien problem... they in fact created the problem... by refusing to properly oversee the USCIS ... DHS and other agencies charged with enforcing our immigration law.  Congress is the problem not the solution.

If legal immigration were capped, the current immigration laws enforced and our borders properly secured ... Americas would not have an immigration problem.  Congress has consistently avoided doing what is best for America regarding immigration... they are the culprits responsible for our present situation... Looking for Congress to solve the immigration conundrum is not going to work. 

Chain migration should not include the Dreamer's illegal alien parents -- but it does!* If they want that, birthright reform must be passed.

And it is only fair to have those seeking amnesty now to help pay for the wall to help lower its costs of its construction for other citizens and help prevent this kind of situation from happening again ten years down the road.
* Source: Watter's World


No AMNESTY... deport the illegals now and secure the border. The CURRENT LAWS are sufficient to this task if enforced. Go after employers and government agents (elected and appointed) who are harboring illegal aliens and breaking the existing laws... the jobs and services will dry up and the illegals will self-deport.

The President already has the authority to build the wall...  (2006 Secure Fence Act) it simply needs to be funded... and that too can be done without Congress... thru the use of regulatory authority and Presidential EO's, to increase border crossing fees and tariffs (all within the President's authority)... Financing the wall can be done with a Federal BOND ISSUE, paid for by border crossing fees and tariffs.  The President doesn't need Congress to fund and build the wall.

NO MORE BETRAYALS... the disgraceful immigration plan being prepared in the White House and the failure of the President to actively and aggressively drain the swamp, will result in his prompt removal in the 2020 election cycle... it he continues down this road to political suicide. The President needs to get rid of those counselling him to go against his campaign promises... and any attempt to REDEFINE those promises... will simply double down on the rage building in your constituents.

Democrats in Congress have blocked appropriations for the wall... arguing the barrier is too costly and a step away from their stated goal of “comprehensive immigration reform,” a code-phrase for proposed legislation that typically includes de facto amnesty for the millions of illegal immigrants already in the United States.  The Wall is both feasible and a low cost solution to securing the border... when compared to doing nothing (costs of illegal immigration far exceed the cost of the wall) or using a system of electronic barriers which have not worked.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/1-main-reason-u-s-border-wall-hasnt-been...






Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester


Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.


Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service