Attorney General Jeff Sessions says DACA immigration policy is being rescinded
- Thread starter Socreta93
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Trump needs to visit the Statue of Liberty
STATUE OF LIBERTY
“Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled massesyearning to breathe free/The wretched refuse of your teeming shore/Send these,the homeless, tempest-tost to me/I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
"The Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World" wasa gift of friendship from the people of France to the United States and isrecognized as a universal symbol of freedom and democracy. The Statue ofLiberty was dedicated on October 28, 1886. It was designated as aNational Monument in 1924. Employees of the National Park Service havebeen caring for the colossal copper statue since 1933.
In 1892, the U.S. government opened a federal immigrationstation on EllisIsland, located near Bedloe’s Island in Upper New York Bay. Between 1892and 1954, some 12 million immigrants were processed on Ellis Island beforereceiving permission to enter the United States. From 1900-14, during the peakyears of its operation, some 5,000 to 10,000 people passed through every day.
Today Trump did a 180 and now says he's for a permanent solution from Congress so that will allow these people to remain in the US. He says one thing and his administration says another thing altogether. They need to get on the same page. He made a deal with the Democrats today allowing for a 3 month extension before a budget is passed. This undercuts the Republicans who were going to use this leverage to push through income tax reform by attaching this legislation to a budget deal. That's gone now.
1- DACA was an illegally signed executive order by Obama.
2- Obama did not have the authority to enact DACA.
3- Obama tried to get DACA legislation passed through congress for 2 years before he decided to make it an executive order (which he did not have the power to do but did it anyway)
4- Trump is putting congress's foot to the fire to get a proper replacement for DACA passed within 6 months.
5 - Trump said if congress can't pass a replacement in 6 months, he will revisit the issue
6 - I really wish Trump would have waited until he had drafted up some kind of proposed replacement before cancelling DACA.
7 - You're welcome.
2- Obama did not have the authority to enact DACA.
3- Obama tried to get DACA legislation passed through congress for 2 years before he decided to make it an executive order (which he did not have the power to do but did it anyway)
4- Trump is putting congress's foot to the fire to get a proper replacement for DACA passed within 6 months.
5 - Trump said if congress can't pass a replacement in 6 months, he will revisit the issue
6 - I really wish Trump would have waited until he had drafted up some kind of proposed replacement before cancelling DACA.
7 - You're welcome.
Last edited:
I suspect that DACA will not be ended entirely as there have been thousands (perhaps as many as 50,000 people) who have used it to enlist in the USA military: https://www.thebalance.com/immigrants-in-the-us-armed-forces-3353965
Many of these people have served in Afghanistan and Iraq even though they still are have not been granted citizenship. It is highly improbable that Trump or anyone else is going to take so much as one step to remove them back to their country of origin.
7
right
my legal entrance cost my husband 7500.00 US...and a year and half waiting, with a lawyer. everything went smoothly
we've been married going on 18 years but that did not factor into my entrance.
there are many people waiting for legal entrance. I went through the entire process and will not expect the government to give me 1 single cent. nothing for free.
I agree that the 'dreamers' should not be put out...I cannot imagine how difficult it would be having grown up in the US and then sent into a country that would be foreign and without the life they are used to
however, DACA was and is illegal and a better and legal solution needs to be worked out
it's enough with the illegals...they are not immigrants
The recent announcement to end daca unless Congress passes an amnesty bill isn’t really
about immigration. It is about overturning an unconstitutional power grab perpetrated by
the administration of the previous president.
One thing all Americans should be able to agree on is that presidents shouldn’t be
allowed to flout the separation of powers doctrine and create new laws out of thin air.
If respect for the Constitution erodes to a point where the rule of law no longer
restrains political parties, there would be no guarantee of liberty!
about immigration. It is about overturning an unconstitutional power grab perpetrated by
the administration of the previous president.
One thing all Americans should be able to agree on is that presidents shouldn’t be
allowed to flout the separation of powers doctrine and create new laws out of thin air.
If respect for the Constitution erodes to a point where the rule of law no longer
restrains political parties, there would be no guarantee of liberty!
DACA happened because the GOP filibustered the Dream Act legislation, and Obama, having compassion, made the considered and informed decision to implement an enforcement policy that shows grace to a category of illegal immigrants who are productive, non-criminal members of our society, voluntarily self-identifying as illegals, and who were initially brought here as children, not by their own volition.
DACA hasn't been ruled on by the Supreme Court -- Trump doesn't get to decide what's constitutional or not. that would be a power grab in its own right, acting as though that the Executive branch gets to do the Judicial branch's job. it's premature for anyone to call it 'unconsitutional' and it has in fact passed challenges in lower courts many times.
DACA is an enforcement policy: the Executive branch has the responsibility to enforce the laws, and it is within its prerogative to prioritize enforcement of law when it is not possible to fully enforce it for all cases. DACA is a guiding principal of enforcement that amounts to neglecting to pursue deportation for people brought to the US as children so long as they are not engaged in criminal activity, apply for consideration for deferred deportation, and remain registered in this way under the act. inasmuch as this prosecutorial discretion, it is not unconstitutional and not an illegal power-grab, and it is not without precedent.
it's the same thing, fundamentally, as police in your town deciding not to pull everyone over and write them tickets for going 1mph over the limit: while technically they have every right to do so, because there are pragmatic limits to how many people who are breaking motor vehicle laws can reasonably be apprehended and prosecuted, the police force pragmatically and preferentially makes the decision to concentrate their efforts on what it deems as more serious and dangerous crimes.
DACA hasn't been ruled on by the Supreme Court -- Trump doesn't get to decide what's constitutional or not. that would be a power grab in its own right, acting as though that the Executive branch gets to do the Judicial branch's job. it's premature for anyone to call it 'unconsitutional' and it has in fact passed challenges in lower courts many times.
DACA is an enforcement policy: the Executive branch has the responsibility to enforce the laws, and it is within its prerogative to prioritize enforcement of law when it is not possible to fully enforce it for all cases. DACA is a guiding principal of enforcement that amounts to neglecting to pursue deportation for people brought to the US as children so long as they are not engaged in criminal activity, apply for consideration for deferred deportation, and remain registered in this way under the act. inasmuch as this prosecutorial discretion, it is not unconstitutional and not an illegal power-grab, and it is not without precedent.
it's the same thing, fundamentally, as police in your town deciding not to pull everyone over and write them tickets for going 1mph over the limit: while technically they have every right to do so, because there are pragmatic limits to how many people who are breaking motor vehicle laws can reasonably be apprehended and prosecuted, the police force pragmatically and preferentially makes the decision to concentrate their efforts on what it deems as more serious and dangerous crimes.
i agree that for Trump it's probably not about immigration at all.
though i think it's not for him about 'constitutionality' or 'rule of law' in any way at all either -- he doesn't have a track record of respecting those things in any meaningful sense.
i believe it's much more likely that this man has a list of the previous administration's accomplishments, and he has been going through them one-by-one trying to undo them all, without any thought given to their worth or to the effect that erasing them may have.
if you look at what he's done since day one, that narrative i just offered matches reality pretty darn well.
though i think it's not for him about 'constitutionality' or 'rule of law' in any way at all either -- he doesn't have a track record of respecting those things in any meaningful sense.
i believe it's much more likely that this man has a list of the previous administration's accomplishments, and he has been going through them one-by-one trying to undo them all, without any thought given to their worth or to the effect that erasing them may have.
if you look at what he's done since day one, that narrative i just offered matches reality pretty darn well.
It will be recalled that just a few weeks ago, Trump said that the president's power to grant pardons for "any and all offenses against the United States" is unlimited under the Constitution. Naturally it follows that if this is accurate, then the president's authority to grant pardons for violating federal immigration law is unlimited as well.
Originally Posted by p_rehbein
Just to be clear:
The Quote from the Statue of Liberty HAS NOTHING do do with ILLEGAL ALIENS! It is speaking of those who come here LEGALLY seeking to better their lives........
Just to be clear:
The Quote from the Statue of Liberty HAS NOTHING do do with ILLEGAL ALIENS! It is speaking of those who come here LEGALLY seeking to better their lives........
Historically, Lady Liberty was not created to represent immigration at all but as a symbol of freedom from all manner of political repression, including slavery:
https://www.howtallisthestatueofliberty.org/what-does-the-statue-of-liberty-represent/
''Lady Liberty’s classic stature, face, and attire come from the Roman goddess Libertas, who also represents freedom from tyranny and oppression.''
" The conventional interpretation of the statue as a monument to American immigrants is a twentieth-century phenomenon. In its early years (1871-1886), that view was only rarely and vaguely expressed, while references to the Civil War and abolition of slavery occur repeatedly from its first introduction to the United States in 1871 up to and including the dedication celebrations in 1886. Immigrants did not actually see the Statue of Liberty in large numbers until after its unveiling. In the early twentieth century, the statue became a popular symbol for nativists and white supremacists. Official use of the statue's image to appeal to immigrants only began in earnest with public efforts to Americanize immigrant children and the government’s advertising campaign for World War I bonds. The "immigrant" interpretation gained momentum in the 1930s as Americans prepared for war with Hitler and by the 1950s, it had become the predominant understanding of the statue's original purpose and meaning."
https://www.nps.gov/stli/learn/historyculture/black-statue-of-liberty.htm
Christians own the world; and anywhere you want to stay is yours as a Christian. The rules of the world don't counts. You function according to the rules of your HOLY FATHER. The world belongs to GOD ALMIGHTY our HOLY FATHER and HE willed the whole world to Abraham through the covenant He made with him and his seed. And it is written, "And if ye be CHRIST'S, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise (Galatians 3:29)."
Any Christian who was depending on DACA should change his/her mind set today and believe the WORD OF GOD. The world is yours and you are free to stay anywhere. So, no matter what President Trump or Congress do about DACA, that has nothing to do with you.
Any Christian who was depending on DACA should change his/her mind set today and believe the WORD OF GOD. The world is yours and you are free to stay anywhere. So, no matter what President Trump or Congress do about DACA, that has nothing to do with you.
GOP, as far as i know the land promised to Abrahams descendants is a large portion of the Mideast, not the whole earth. And doesn't the scripture say 'obey the authorities' in Romans 13?
i wasn't redeemed from lawlessness in order to be an arrogant, disobedient criminal. It's the meek that will inherit the earth, not the proud, and even Abraham let Lot choose the part of the land he preferred.
If you were saying, 'don't let anyone keep you from evangelizing' that would be an argument worth making, but 'you own the whole world so ignore the authority God has set up and take whatever land pleases you' ?? How is that righteous or scriptural ?!?
i wasn't redeemed from lawlessness in order to be an arrogant, disobedient criminal. It's the meek that will inherit the earth, not the proud, and even Abraham let Lot choose the part of the land he preferred.
If you were saying, 'don't let anyone keep you from evangelizing' that would be an argument worth making, but 'you own the whole world so ignore the authority God has set up and take whatever land pleases you' ?? How is that righteous or scriptural ?!?
i think you still don't get it.
DACA isn't a "law" it's a policy outline of prosecutorial discretion.
it's effectively a directive to the immigration board not to bother tracking down and arresting people who fall into the categories it outlines. in that respect it is no different from Highway Patrol making it a policy not to bother pulling people over for speeding unless they are going 10mph+ over the speed limit, or are driving recklessly in some capacity other than their velocity. that doesn't "legalize speeding" -- if an officer for whatever reason feels it's necessary to bust someone only going 6mph over the limit, they still can and will. DACA doesn't "legalize illegal immigrants" either - if they don't apply for deferred deportation, or if they are arrested for any other reason, or even if they just happen to tick off the wrong immigration officer, they still face being deported.
it doesn't give aliens a path to citizenship; that was part of the failed Dream Act.
DACA isn't a "law" it's a policy outline of prosecutorial discretion.
it's effectively a directive to the immigration board not to bother tracking down and arresting people who fall into the categories it outlines. in that respect it is no different from Highway Patrol making it a policy not to bother pulling people over for speeding unless they are going 10mph+ over the speed limit, or are driving recklessly in some capacity other than their velocity. that doesn't "legalize speeding" -- if an officer for whatever reason feels it's necessary to bust someone only going 6mph over the limit, they still can and will. DACA doesn't "legalize illegal immigrants" either - if they don't apply for deferred deportation, or if they are arrested for any other reason, or even if they just happen to tick off the wrong immigration officer, they still face being deported.
it doesn't give aliens a path to citizenship; that was part of the failed Dream Act.
the facts:
it had been proposed and in the works since around 2000
in 2010, it passed the House.
in the Senate, 3 R's were for it and 5 D's were against it. that was still enough to pass the bill, but the GOP filibustered it. if you don't know what that means, it means they took turns talking and talking and talking, about meaningless, unrelated things, so that by them occupying the floor during debate, it couldn't be voted on. the GOP actually did this quite alot during Obama's presidency, and ((lo and behold)) now that they control congress, they say it's unethical to filibuster and some want to get rid of it. lol??
when a bill is filibustered in the Senate, a simple majority isn't enough to break it - you need 3/5 majority, i.e. 60 votes. they only had 55.
if not for the filibuster, it would have passed, 55-41, with a few senators abstaining.
it didn't get past debate in the Senate not because debate resulted in it looking like a bad law -- it didn't get past debate because the GOP, knowing that they had lost their fight against it, prevented it from coming up for a vote.
news article from back then here:
DREAM Act dies in Senate - POLITICO