As a faithful and longtime reader of the Wall Street Journal, I have constantly appreciated the viewpoints of its editorial board. I must take exception with the Journal’s “A Bad GOP Dream,” which gets it all incorrect on why I led a 10-state union asking President Trump to rescind the Obama administration’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
At the beginning, let me set the record directly: Our demand does not ask the federal government to deport any alien presently covered by DACA. Nor does it ask the Trump administration to rescind DACA authorizations that have currently been released. Rather, the demand is to phase out these illegal actions by not restoring or releasing any brand-new DACA authorizations.
It’s a secret to me how the Journal can implicate our union of political grandstanding when the editorial board itself acknowledges that “DACA has comparable constitutional shortages” as the Obama-era memo that developed the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) program in 2014. In both cases, the Executive Branch “took over Congress’s law-writing power,” to estimate from the editorial. The guideline of law should not be dismissed because the Journal concurs with policies consisted of in DACA. That’s the same reasoning that the Obama administration used when unlawfully developing DAPA and DACA.
DACA sets off many effects. Throughout Texas’s effective claim versus DAPA, we found out that DACA receivers have even been offered Green Cards, and therefore a path to citizenship– regardless of the Obama administration’s preliminary promise that DACA does not give such a legal course to citizenship.
Apart from a path to citizenship, DACA enables aliens to leave and return to the nation, gets rid of eligibility bars from Social Security, Medicare, and the Earned Income Tax Credit, and gives eligibility for state advantages such as motorist’s licenses and joblessness insurance. Since August 2016, more than 220,000 unlawfully present aliens in Texas requested an authorization or a renewal of one under DACA, and almost 200,000 of those were authorized.
While functioning as President, Barack Obama consistently exhorted Congress to pass the DREAM Act, which would typically enable unlawfully present aliens who got in the nation before age 16 to look for legal status. Congress consistently declined, so President Obama bypassed Congress and unilaterally hatched DACA.
As the Journal notes, DACA resembles DAPA, which likewise attempted to bypass Congress and unilaterally give legal existence and work permission on countless unlawfully present aliens.
The Department of Homeland Security lastly withdrawal the 2014 DAPA program last month, but DHS likewise mentioned that the 2012 DACA program and some licenses provided under the 2014 program would stay in the result.
My letter to the Trump administration was composed in reaction to that memo and requests for a total stage out of DACA.
Phasing out DACA must do with the guideline of law, not the knowledge of any specific migration policy.
Our country was established on the advanced idea we now call the separation of powers: Constitutional governmental authority must be separated into 3 unique branches– the legal to make the laws, the executive to carry out those laws, and the judicial to translate them.
The separation of these powers secures the country from becoming the monarchy from which our predecessors compromised their lives to declare self-reliance. Debt consolidation of power is tyranny, the extreme opposite principle of the fundamental concepts stated by our Constitution.
President Obama understood this. Early in his 2nd term, he described of migration reform:
” I’m not a king … If this was an issue that I might do unilaterally I would have done it a very long time earlier.” He described that “the way our system works is Congress has to pass legislation. I then get a chance to sign it and execute it.”.
It’s an embarrassment he neglected his own suggestions.
We concur with the Journal that a way to attend to the constitutional shortages of DACA is through Congress. Our union acted because the program stays in place through large unilateral executive fiat.
We’ve offered the Trump administration until September 5 to accept phase out DACA. Otherwise, our claim challenging illegal deferred-action programs presently pending in district court will be modified to challenge the renewal or issuance of any brand-new DACA allows in the future.
As soon as once again, our demand does not get in touch with the executive branch to modify migration enforcement top priorities or deport any unlawfully present aliens.
In 2015, when a Texas-led claim of 26 states culminated in the United States Supreme Court obstructing President Obama’s illegal deferred-action policies, consisting of DAPA, then-candidate Trump was entirely appropriate when he stated that the Court “obstructed among the most unconstitutional actions ever carried out by a President.”.
DACA is precisely like DAPA, and must be phased out to protect the guideline of law.