Administration's
Chaotic Immigration Policies Bring Trouble on Two Horizons
By Dan
Cadman
The Obama
White House is finally beginning to feel the consequences of cause and effect
where its immigration policies are concerned. Like a paralysis-inducing spider
wasp laying its eggs into its prey, it has pretty much cowed our congressional
leaders into crippling inactivity in the face of its onslaught of legally
dubious "executive actions". But the third branch of our tripartite
federal system, the judiciary, has taken action in two different directions and
begun to clamp down on the administration's policies.
On the
west coast, a U.S. District Court judge has ordered an end to detention of
families and unaccompanied minors, spelling potential catastrophe for the
administration's game of laundering such individuals through a period of
lockdown, followed by resettlement with notional orders to appear at hearings,
which the majority simply ignore. This is a potential game changer in the
run-up to the presidential elections, because a repeated land-based tsunami of
aliens proving the existence of an out-of-control southern border will not bode
well for any candidate advocating anything remotely like open borders or a
broad-based amnesty.
In
southern Texas, another U.S. District Court judge continues moving inexorably
toward a show-cause hearing on August 19, in which the administration will be
forced to explain publicly why it was either unwilling or unable to comply with
his order enjoining the government's plans to extend and enlarge the pool of
illegal aliens being granted "lawful status" and work permits to
remain in the United States indefinitely, in three-year increments.
The family
detention case has the administration scrambling — they clearly understand what
is at play — and, for the moment, we are seeing a ray of sunshine and honesty
instead of the usual fog of obfuscation they churn out. The Washington Times
reports that the deputy chief of the Border Patrol has provided a declaration
accompanying a last-ditch petition to the court to reconsider its decision to
end the detention. One of the things that has come out of that affidavit is the
admission that last month there was a surge of families and minors mirroring
the one that occurred in the summer of 2014. This isn't — or shouldn't be —
news; CIS's Jessica Vaughan has reported on the continuing flow, even as the
administration tried to hide it. It is a measure of the administration's
desperation that they now admit as much, even as they also ramp up a second go
at trying to persuade Central Americans not to make the trek because
"there are no permisos". This line of argument is, of course, fatuous
and insulting to the intelligence of Central Americans, whether or not they
decide to try. They are smart enough to know that almost no one has actually
been deported. Who needs a formal permit if you are released from detention and
are so low on the list of so-called "enforcement priorities" that
it's unlikely you will ever be picked up even if you do flout your immigration
hearing and disappear to live and work wherever you choose?
In the
matter of the injunction, there are actually two fronts: the show-cause hearing
and the decision in chief, which is now at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
and will either result in an order by the appellate judges lifting the
injunction and permitting the executive branch to move forward with its plans
or in the court upholding the restraining order (which seems more likely), in
which case the administration will have to decide whether to seek a Supreme
Court hearing at which they risk being shut down in the most formidable terms.
But as the appellate decision plays out it will be interesting to see how the
government presents its justification for not obeying the injunction when it
comes to court on the 19th.
Initially,
the judge ordered that senior Homeland Security officials, including the
secretary, present themselves personally to explain why they should not be held
in contempt. Media outlets are now reporting that the judge has excused their
presence — it seems to me a shame that he has let them off the hook, given
their arrogance — but he is still requiring the hearing on the substantive
matter of why the government either willfully or out of negligence failed so
abysmally to comply with his original order enjoining further issuance of
documents.
In a court
document filed in anticipation of the hearing, the 26 states that are
plaintiffs in the case against the administration have laid out in excruciating
detail how government officials repeatedly violated the order and continued to
issue new documents even while claiming to be in compliance.
I can
hardly wait to see the adroit acrobatic flips, twists, and handsprings the
government's lawyers will have to undertake in order to try to help the White
House and its minions wiggle out of the bind into which they have put
themselves.
Reprinted for Dan Cadman’s Blog
featured on the Center for Immigration Studies website (www.cis.com). Dan is a friend and former
colleague from my days with the US Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Ben Ferro (Editor)
No comments:
Post a Comment
We value your comments