WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE?
THERE HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 2,000 CALIFORNIANS MURDERED BY INVADING MEXICANS.
NEARLY HALF THE MURDERS IN CA ARE NOW BY MEX GANGS!
Lawless: The Obama Adminstration’s Uprecedented Assault on the Constitution and the Rule of Law 12:00-1:00 p.m., Tuesday, November 17, 2015
The Heritage Foundation, Lehrman Auditorium
214 Massachusetts Ave NE
Washington DC 20002-4999
Overview: In Lawless, George Mason University law professor David E. Bernstein offers a scholarly and unsettling account of how the Obama Administration has undermined the Constitution and the rule of law. He documents how the President has presided over one constitutional debacle after another – from Obamacare to unauthorized wars in the Middle East to attempts to strip property owners, college students, religious groups, and conservative political activists of their rights, and more.
Respect for the Constitution’s separation of powers has been violated time and again. Whether in amending Obamacare on the fly or signing a memorandum legalizing millions of illegal immigrants, the current Administration ignores not only Congress, but also the Constitution’s critical checks and balances.
In Lawless, Professor Bernstein shows how the Constitution as well as the President’s own stated principles have been betrayed. In doing so, serious and potentially permanent damage has been done to our constitutional system and repairs must be addressed by the next President of the United States.
Voters Favor 'Kate's Law' Sentences for Illegal Immigrant Felons
Fifty-six percent (56%) of Likely U.S. Voters favor a five-year mandatory prison sentence for illegal immigrants convicted of major felonies who return to America after being deported. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 27% oppose such legislation, while 18% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Seventy-two percent (72%) of Republicans and 53% of voters not affiliated with either major political party favor a law like the proposed Kate's Law. Democrats agree by a much narrower 43% to 36% margin, with 21% undecided.
Fifty-nine percent (59%) of voters say the federal government is not aggressive enough in punishing illegal immigrants who commit felony crimes in this country. Just 22% believe the government is aggressive enough in punishing these individuals, but nearly as many (19%) are not sure.
Following Steinle's murder by an illegal immigrant from Mexico who had been deported several times and come back, 62% of voters said the U.S. Justice Department should take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants, and 58% said the federal government should cut off funding for those cities. Republicans in Congress included Kate's Law in legislation to cut funding to “sanctuary cities." President Obama threatened to veto the measure, but Senate Democrats stopped it procedurally.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
The survey of 1,000 Likely U.S. Voters was conducted on October 28-29, 2015 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Fifty-three percent (53%) of voters believe illegal immigration increases the level of serious crime in America. Thirty-three percent (33%) say it has no impact on crime. More voters than ever feel the United States is not aggressive enough in deporting those who are here illegally.
Even just 27% of Democrats think the federal government is aggressive enough in punishing illegal immigrants who commit felonies. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of GOP voters and 56% of unaffiliateds say the government is not aggressive enough in this area.
The older the voter, the more supportive he or she is of mandatory prison terms for felons who reenter the United States after being deported.
Blacks and whites favor mandatory sentences more than other minority voters do. Other minority voters are also more likely than the others to think the federal government is already aggressive enough in punishing illegal immigrants who commit felonies.
Most voters who favor such mandatory sentencing (77%) think the government is not aggressive enough in punishing illegal immigrants who commit felony crimes. Just 30% of those who oppose the legislation agree, but only 41% of these voters think the government is tough enough on illegal immigrants who commit felonies.
Voters remain seriously worried about illegal immigration and still think stricter border control is the best way to stop it.
Most voters continue to believe the policies and practices of the federal government encourage, rather than discourage, illegal immigration.
Obama’s plan to exempt millions of illegal immigrants from deportation still remains on hold courtesy of the federal courts, and that’s fine with most voters who continue to oppose the plan.
Additional information from this survey and a full demographic breakdown are available to Platinum Members only.
Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free) or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.
November 04, 2015, 01:29 pm
Reid blocks Cruz on tougher penalties for illegal immigrants
By Mark Krikorian
CIS Blog, October 30, 2015
In response the surge of Central Americans sneaking into Texas in the summer of 2014, the Obama administration launched an ad campaign in the sending countries earlier this year to stem the flow. The radio and TV spots assert that "there are no permits for the people trying to cross the border without papers" and promise "the immediate deportation of those trying to cross the border without documents."
None of it is true. There are permits for illegal-alien minors and families. Formally known as Notices to Appear but known colloquially in Spanish as permisos, they require the aliens to present themselves to immigration authorities by a certain date, until which they have temporary legal status. That gives them time enough to travel to join their relatives and disappear into the existing illegal population. And disappear they do, since, despite the tough promises, virtually none of them are deported, immediately or otherwise.
So it should come as no surprise to read today's AP report, which begins this way:
Once again, President Obama is looking to defy Congress in implementing its immigration reform proposals. This time, his administration is looking to also defy a federal court to achieve it. A judge sitting on the 5th Circuit in Texas issued an...
Obama set to defy federal court on amnesty
This time, his administration is looking to also defy a federal court to achieve it.
This time, his administration is looking to also defy a federal court to achieve it.
A judge sitting on the 5th Circuit in Texas issued an injunction last June against the administration's regulatory plans to legalize millions of aliens in the U.S. illegally. The injunction was upheld by a federal appeals court in Louisiana, and the president's plan is now stalled while the administration works through the federal court system.
Except now there are plans afoot to change the regulations pertaining to green cards that would accomplish almost everything the president can't get from Congress or the courts. A leaked memo from DHS outlines four plans the administration is considering.
Ian Smith of the Immigration Reform Law Institute:
The internal memo reveals four options of varying expansiveness, with option 1 providing EADs to “all individuals living in the United States”, including illegal aliens, visa-overstayers, and H-1B guest-workers, while option 4 provides EADsonly to those on certain unexpired non-immigrant visas. Giving EADs to any of the covered individuals, however, is in direct violation of Congress’s Immigration & Nationality Act and works to dramatically subvert our carefully wrought visa system.Get a load of what the DHS bureaucrats think about illegals working in the U.S.:
As mentioned, the first plan the memo discusses basically entails giving EADs to anyone physically present in the country who until now has been prohibited from getting one. A major positive to this option, the memo reads, is that it would “address the needs of some of the intended deferred action population.” Although DHS doesn’t say it expressly, included here would be those 4.3 million people covered by the president’s DAPA and Expanded DACA programs whose benefits were supposed to have been halted in the Hanen decision. On top of working around the Hanen injunction, this DHS plan would also dole out unrestricted EADs to those on temporary non-immigrant visas, such as H-1B-holders (their work authorizations being tied to their employers) and another 5 to 6 million illegal aliens thus far not covered by any of the President’s deferred action amnesty programs. By claiming absolute authority to grant work authorization to any alien, regardless of status, DHS is in effect claiming it can unilaterally de-couple the 1986 IRCA work authorization statutes from the main body of U.S. visa law. While DHS must still observe the statutory requirements for issuing visas, the emerging doctrine concedes, the administration now claims unprecedented discretionary power to permit anyone inside our borders to work.
The anonymous DHS policymakers state that a positive for this option is that it “could cover a greater number of individuals.” In a strikingly conclusory bit of bureaucratese, they state that because illegal aliens working in the country “have already had the US labor market tested” it has been “demonstrat[ed] that their future employment won’t adversely affect US workers.” The labor market, in other words, has already been stress-tested through decades of foreign-labor dumping and the American working-class, which disproportionately includes minorities, working mothers, the elderly, and students, is doing just fine. Apparently, the fact that 66 million Americans and legal aliens are currently unemployed or out of the job-market was not a discussion point at the DHS “Retreat.”Smith concludes: "Bottom line: The memo foreshadows more tactical offensives in a giant administrative amnesty for all 12 million illegal aliens who’ve broken our immigration laws (and many other laws) that will emerge before the next inaugural in January 2016."
I'm not sure that judge in Texas will let the administration get away with this. When the government began handing out green cards anyway in defiance of the injunction, the judge, Andrew Hanen, threatened to arrest the lot of them for contempt. He forced the government to recall the green cards immediately. There will be no circumventing the law in his court.
But the plans may be untouchable because they don't directly stem from the series of executive orders currently being adjudicated. Of course, any plan to blanket the country in work permits for illegals will be challenged in court. But eventually, the administration may find a friendly judge who gives it the go-ahead.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/11/obama_set_to_defy_federal_court_on_amnesty.html#ixzz3qSG6XCr3
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
JUDICIAL WATCH. org
This proves that legislation to crack down on jurisdictions that obstruct enforcement of federal immigration law is long overdue. In fact, the measure was inspired by the summer murder of a San Francisco woman by an illegal immigrant with seven felony convictions and five deportation orders. Because San Francisco is an illegal alien sanctuary, local law enforcement officials don’t notify the feds about detainees who should be deported. Federal lawmakers want to send those municipalities a message, says the senator that introduced the measure, Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act.
If it passes federal funding will be withheld from sanctuary states or cities that fail to comply with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued detainer requests for illegal aliens. The money would be redirected to states and localities that follow the law. “There is absolutely no reason that any U.S. city should be allowed to ignore our nation’s immigration laws and provide a safe harbor for illegal immigrants,” said Louisiana Senator David Vitter, in a statement introducing the measure this month. Illegal immigrants have committed other murders and terrible acts of violence across the U.S. since the San Francisco incident that drew national attention, Vitter said.
That’s because in less than a year 340 sanctuary cities, counties and states around the U.S. released 9,295 alien offenders that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was seeking to deport. More than half had significant prior criminal histories and 600 were released at least twice by jurisdictions that protect criminal aliens from deportation by refusing to comply with ICE detainers. The figures were made public recently by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a nonprofit dedicated to researching the consequences of legal and illegal immigration into the United States.
Of the illegal immigrants released into unsuspecting communities, 58% had prior felony charges or convictions and 37% had serious prior misdemeanor charges, the CIS probe found. An astounding 2,320 of the freed offenders were subsequently arrested within the eight-month time period studied for new crimes. Here’s an enraging example included in the CIS document: Victor Aureliano Hernandez Ramirez, arrested in July 2015 for raping and bludgeoning a 64-year-old California woman who died eight days later. Ramirez had been arrested for battery a year earlier but the county sheriff blew off an ICE detainer that would have deported him in accordance with California’s state sanctuary law.
Once these criminal illegal aliens are freed by sanctuary cities, ICE has difficulty tracking them down, according to records obtained for the study. As of last year, 6,460 (69%) were still at large. Of those still at large, 1,377 (20%) had another criminal arrest following the one that resulted in the original ICE detainer. This is why a violent criminal, Francisco Javier Chavez, is on the loose. In August 2015 he was arrested for beating his girlfriend’s 2-year-old daughter and, despite an extensive criminal record that includes felony drug and drunk-driving convictions, a California sheriff’s department ignored an ICE detainer and released him.
California is the biggest offender when it comes to blowing off federal orders to hand over criminal illegal aliens, according to ICE records cited in the study. A chart offers a breakdown of the cities and counties that release the largest amount of criminal aliens identified by the feds for removal. Santa Clara County takes the prize with 1,349 for 2014 followed by Los Angeles and Alameda counties with 572 each. Miami Dade County in south Florida came in fourth with 491. “We need to send a loud and clear message to any sanctuary cities that their dangerous policies are not acceptable,”
Senator Vitter said.