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The Department of Homeland Security formally rescinded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA, with a six-month delay for current recipients.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: 2631

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

DACA -Immigrant Youth Conduct Lobbying Blitz for the Dream Act — Visit 80 House Republican Offices in One Day!


Tif will be working on the FISA, and I will followup on DACA, the documents researched, are now slowly being shared.



DACA Docs Phase 1: CDDEP File Recent Data Extended Medical Files


McConnell to open up Senate floor for 'fair' debate over DACA

The DACA fight in the Senate starts next Monday!
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced this week that he'll open up the Senate floor for a debate over DACA starting on Monday.

The move keeps his promise to Democrats that was part of the deal to end the government shutdown over DACA last month.

We know very few details about how next week's debate will proceed.
"The bill I move to, which will not have underlying immigration text, will have an amendment process that will ensure a level playing field at the outset."

-- Sen. Majority Leader McConnell
We do know that the Senate will hold a procedural vote at 5:30 p.m on Monday to begin debate on an unrelated House-passed bill that will then become the vehicle for a DACA amnesty.
The Options

We anticipate that the several different working groups in the Senate will offer their proposals and need 60 votes to become the base bill. McConnell will then likely allow a process for Senators to offer amendments to make changes to the base bill.
The are four proposals that could become the base bill:

1) The White House Proposal -- The proposal released by the White House just before last month's State of the Union would expand DACA to grant an immediate amnesty to approximately 1.8 million illegal aliens. It calls for a $25 billion trust fund to build the border wall and improve overall border security. It would eliminate the Visa Lottery and halt new applications for Chain Migration, but because it allows in the more than 4 million foreigners on the visa waiting list, it wouldn't actually end Chain Migration for 15-20 years.

2) Gang of 6 Proposal -- The Gang of 6 is led by former Gang of 8 members Senators Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). It also includes a few other former Gang of 8 members, including Senators Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), and Jeff Flake (R-Fla.). Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) is also part of the group.
Their proposal would grant an immediate amnesty to 3.2 million young-adult illegal aliens and their illegal-alien parents. It includes $1.6 billion for a border wall, but it restricts the funding to only making improvements to existing fencing. It fails to end Chain Migration and repurposes the Visa Lottery green cards, allowing half of them to be issued to foreigners from Lottery countries and the other half for TPS recipients.

3) "Common Sense" Caucus -- There are few details from this led by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) that includes moderate Republicans and Democrats.
The Washington Times reported last night that the proposal would grant amnesty to the 1.8 million illegal aliens identified by the White House, authorize $25 billion for a border wall, but only appropriate about 10% of it, and make tweaks to the Visa Lottery and Chain Migration without reducing overall immigration numbers.

4) McCain/Coons -- Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) have their own "skinny" proposal that would grant amnesty to 3.2 million illegal aliens and require a government study on the effectiveness of building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. While the McCain/Coons proposal is unlikely to get anywhere, several Republican Senators have discussed a smaller deal that would trade a DACA amnesty for border security funding.

None of the proposals come close to matching up to Rep. Goodlatte's H.R. 4760, the Securing America's Future Act, which continues to gain momentum in the House. The bill now has 90 cosponsors, and several of the new cosponsors are highlighted below.
H.R. 4760 would limit the amnesty to the 690,000 DACA recipients, end both Chain Migration and the Visa Lottery, and prevent future amnesties by requiring all employers to use E-Verify.
Trump is the wildcard

Much of what happens next week will depend on what Pres. Trump says or doesn't say. He's already rejected both the Gang of 6 proposal and the McCain/Coons proposal.
But he also said during his White House immigration roundtable last month that he'll sign whatever Congress can pass. While the White House has its own proposal on the table, no one knows if that's meant to serve as a starting point or the worst deal he would accept.

What can you do?
On Monday, we'll begin a massive grassroots phoning effort, urging the Senate to include an end to Chain Migration and the Visa Lottery with immediate relief for American workers in any deal on DACA.

Be on the lookout for email alerts each day that the Senate debate continues, asking you to take specific actions. This is the best chance we've had in years to make positive reforms to our immigration system that better serve the national interest by protecting American workers. But, at the same time, the risk of a bad bill passing is also extremely high.


These rude, selfish, ungrateful criminals could simply apply for citizenship and yet they do not.

Why not? Because they are rude, selfish, lazy, ungrateful criminals with no intention of following or respecting our laws. Not to mention DACA is illegal. Why doesn't someone stand up and say THAT????

It was illegal and unconstitutional by O's own admission but Congress let it slide and now we are paying for it.

Still in favor of s hooting or hanging those elected reps who refuse to follow the Constitution. They are all traitors and pharisees, in love and in servitude to power.


They both of them Watergated the Trump Campaign and tried to make it look like it was honest which anyone can see its not, with their spying for possible collusion, that does not exist BUT all the while Hillary was colluding with Russia and Obama was working with Comey to let Hillary off so she could still run for an election she could not possibly win.

SO investigate all of it with another private counsel ITS THE ONLY WAY!




Mitch McConnell and Senate RINOs to Vote on Amnesty Next Week – STOP THEM! – Call (202) 224-3121



GOP 2016 Trump Border Wall

Poll: 2 of 3 say Congress should enforce immigration laws

'These results should be pretty sobering statistics for Republican members of the House and Senate'

Democrats in Washington has been demanding that nearly 800,000 illegal aliens brought to the United States as children by their parents be given amnesty from the nation’s immigration laws, which would produce new Democrat voters.

Under President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, a portion of the estimated 3.6 million “DREAMers” were given temporary protection from deportation  through an executive order.

President Trump canceled Obama’s order, but even he and other Republican leaders favor legislation that would allow the illegal aliens to remain in the country.

But likely Republican voters disagree.


In fact, a new poll found two out of three say “Congress should focus on enforcing the laws we already have on the books.”

Similarly, 65 percent said Trump should “focus the resources of the federal government to uphold national immigration laws already in place.”

The polling of likely GOP voters was done at the request of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC.

When asked if Congress should “focus on enforcing our existing immigration laws or change laws to provide illegal immigrants with DACA [Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals] amnesty, 67 percent said they “want Congress to simply enforce the laws they’ve already passed, including 72.6 percent of men and 60.2 percent of women.”

“Furthermore, a majority responded in the affirmative in their preference to ‘enforce existing laws’ in every single subset category of respondents,” the report said.

“In addition to the majority of men and women included in the survey, likely Republican primary voters in all four census regions of the country also indicated their preference to enforce existing law, ranging from 61.8 percent in the Midwest to 76.8 percent in the South.”

Republicans, especially, should pay attention, the numbers suggested.

“When looking at respondents in districts represented by a GOP member in Congress across all states (red, purple, and blue), 68.5 percent want their Republican representative and/or senator to enforce the laws already on the books, which includes 73.6 percent of men, 80.5 percent of those below the Mason-Dixon Line, and 76.9 percent in the Midwest,” the survey results revealed.

Explained ALIPAC: “These results should be pretty sobering statistics for Republican members of the House and Senate. Across the board, the voters they must rely upon to get re-elected are dead set in their opposition to amnesty. In a year that many of the experts are already predicting a drop-off in Republican base enthusiasm, any efforts by the Republican-controlled Congress to pass legislative amnesty would further dampen and depress the party faithful’s motivation to turn out in November.”

The survey polled a sample of 540 nationwide Republicans most likely to vote, not only in the upcoming general election, but also in their state’s primary election.

ALIPAC said activists have been visiting Republican lawmakers in Washington to relay the results of the poll.

Some of the individual state results deserve attention, ALIPAC said.

North Carolina likely voters rejected DACA amnesty by 78.6 percent among GOP primary voters in GOP house districts and 66.5 percent in statewide general elections.

In Texas, likely Republican voter in Republican-held house districts chose to prioritize existing laws by 80.6 percent.

It Tennessee, 83.3 percent of likely GOP primary voters rejected DACA amnesty in favor of existing immigration laws.

The results all were close to those also reported in South Carolina, Mississippi, Kansas, Florida and other states.

ALIPAC President William Gheen said the poll results “show us that the majority of Republicans in Washington, D.C., are committing political suicide if they push a button to vote for any compromise or deal on DACA and Dreamer Amnesty for illegal immigrants.”

“We are doing our best to warn Republican lawmakers that if they vote for the Trump immigration framework plan, the Senate Amnesty plans, or even the Goodlatte SAF bill, they will be out of alignment with approximately 4 out of 5 of their core constituencies.

“Unfortunately, our poll and activists are competing with the inaccurate and misleading CBS and Harvard University pro-Amnesty propaganda push polls claiming most Americans want a DACA deal! Our national poll shows the opposite is true so our mission is to get our accurate information to the GOP lawmakers before they make a terrible mistake voting for DACA Amnesty.”

The Democrats’ DACA demands, however, took a hit this week with the approval of a spending plan for the government for two years. They have threatened government shutdowns if the illegals are not allowed to stay.

Republican leaders in Congress and the president are seeking a legislative solution, since the Obama-era protections were intended as a temporary fix while Congress handled the matter, which never happened.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who frequently has called Trump “President Bush,” held the floor for eight-hours Wednesday in support of the “DREAMers.”

Trump has said he’s willing to sign a law resolving the DACA issue, but only if it includes resources, including $25 billion for a border wall, to prevent more people from entering the country illegally.

His ideas have included ending chain migration, restricting the visa lottery that allows tens of thousands into the U.S., and improves in border enforcement.


The only way the public is going to shut down Amnesty and secure our borders is to become actively involved in managing the PRIMARIES.  The People must be in charge of selecting the candidates of the party. The people must fire all of the incumbents, regardless  of who they are, as they are all corrupt.  Any member of Congress, who has sat by while Congress raped America, while catering to special interests, needs to be removed from office. 

The GOP and Congress will not change until we change the GOP and Congressional leadership... all of them.  We need Term Limits due to the rigged primary system... what happened in the Democrat Party during the last Presidential primary is happening in both parties...the people are unable to select candidates in the primaries to represent them... both parties have rigged the system against populace candidates (the people).

Until the GOP demonstrates the WILL to SOUNDLY ROUTE THE DEMOCRATS... the Democrats will continue to act as if they are in charge; demanding suicidal compromises from the GOP while using the rules of Congress, the deep state, and Obama bureaucrats, to disrupt the government.  

The GOP must get off their sorry asses and ram thru all of Trumps programs and appointments...  a CLEAN 2 yr conservative Appropriations Act (w/o Immigration clauses), including funds to secure our borders, build the wall, and rapidly improve our military.  The GOP must stop messing around, end their attempts to negotiate with the Marxist Obstructionist in the Democrat Party... In fact, put the GOP needs to jail most of them for violating a host of federal laws... felony harboring of aliens, espionage (leaking classified information to the MSM), lying to Congress and on and on...

End the Senate Filibuster rule... use a simple majority vote for  ALL business before both Houses of Congress... Impeach a whole host of activist federal judges. End the ability of the minority to shut down Congress and obstruct government.

Re-write the Federal Judiciary Act... ensuring that the inferior federal courts remain within their Constitutional Jurisdiction. The SCOTUS is the only Court with original jurisdiction for cases involving States, Ministries (Departments of Government), and the President.  Our founders never intended that a single Federal Judge would have the power to reverse Congress, the Administration or State Governments... That power rests with the SCOTUS only.  See Article 3, Section 2, Clause 2 of the US Constitution.



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