Mayor Bill de Blasio and 30 other city and county leaders released an open letter to President Barack Obama today, calling on him to extend executive protections for undocumented immigrants in the final weeks before President-elect Donald Trump assumes the Oval Office.
The missive was a collective effort of the Cities for Action coalition, a group of pro-immigration reform municipal leaders that also includes Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, Syracuse Mayor Stephanie Miner and Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney. It expended several paragraphs praising the president for his controversial unilateral actions easing deportation enforcement—particularly the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which shields individuals entered the country without proper paperwork as minors.
As the country braces for Trump to implement plans to expel at least two million foreign nationals, the local officials encouraged the sitting president to allow some 740,000 people participating in DACA to apply for another two-year extension even if their current protection period has yet to expire. Continue reading this article
It sounds good when talking heads on TV jabber that the Republicans control the government, but the reality is more complex. While the GOP dominates the House, the party’s hold on the Senate is a slim 52-seat majority.
Worse, amnesty-hack Repubs are determined to shred US borders and sovereignty — do the names Jeff Flake, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio ring a bell? The traitorous Gang of Eight Republicans remain in the Senate to continue working for amnesty for lawbreakers and increased legal immigration, only the sell-out will now be more sensitively framed as kindness to young DREAMers, etc:
Furthermore, one amnesty of millions in 1986 was an instance of misplaced generosity (where the promised enforcement never occurred) but a second amnesty constitutes a pattern that can never be erased. A second mass reward of lawbreaking foreigners means that immigration anarchy won’t be fixed, ever, because the word will spread across the world that America is still the stupid-generous open-borders soft touch it ever was.
Donald Trump’s pledges to deport undocumented immigrants and build a U.S.-Mexico border wall helped fuel Republicans’ surprising election victories, but they now face growing challenges from fellow party members.
Three Republican senators are working with Democrats to shield about 750,000 young undocumented immigrants from deportation if Trump cancels a 2012 order from President Barack Obama that let them stay in the U.S.
Lawmakers want to “ensure that children who were brought here by their parents, through no fault of their own, are able to stay and finish their education and continue to contribute to society,” said Republican Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona. Republicans Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska are joining him on a measure drafted by the No. 2 Democratic leader, Dick Durbin of Illinois, that will be introduced after the new Congress convenes Jan. 3.
Trump’s campaign was largely powered by his get-tough stance on immigration. A Pew Research Center poll in August found that 79 percent of Trump voters want a border wall, compared with 38 percent of all registered voters.
But among lawmakers in Congress, the desire to build a wall along the entire 1,933-mile border with Mexico has evaporated. Republicans in both chambers instead support more fencing, border patrol agents, drones and other resources to curb illegal entry. House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul said he’ll offer a bill with some of those steps in January. Continue reading this article
For the last several days, the Los Angeles Times has presented a series of featured front page sob stories about how mean America is to illegal aliens. For Christmas day, the front pager was particularly scoldy, by suggesting in effect, “You spoiled citizens are having a wonderful holiday and are too cruel to open your borders to the world’s poor who would like to share the goodies.”
Traveling from Nepal to Tijuana is 8,000 miles, so there’s no question that these are desperate people. But why don’t they pool that considerable energy in organizing to demand their dirt-bag governments be more accountable? Nobody wants to do the hard work of nation-building: they just want to roll in to a place where the government and economy already function.
Note that in the headline below, while thousands are making the long treks from abroad, only “dozens” are sent home. Hmm. Apparently there is no trend toward more enforcement, just a handful of sob stories to be exploited.
Dozens of migrants braved thousands of miles of jungles, seas and bandits to reach the U.S. Then they were sent home.
On a chilly April night in the desert outside Phoenix, Rasel Ahmed, his wrists and ankles bound in cuffs, shuffled onto a bus at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement airfield with a pit in his stomach.
From his home village in the rice fields of eastern Bangladesh, the 30-year-old restaurant worker had traveled through a dozen countries to reach the United States, nearly collapsing in relief when he saw the American flag flying over the border crossing at San Ysidro.
For 18 months he bounced among detention centers in San Diego, Louisiana and Alabama, praying for an immigration judge to let him remain in the country, get a job and support his family 8,000 miles away.
Now it appeared his time had run out.
Rasel sat near the front as the bus approached a plane looming beside an empty airstrip. Two dozen shackled Bangladeshis and Indians twisted in their seats, some shouting in protest, when the bus stopped.
An immigration officer who looked to be from Pakistan barked at the group in Urdu: “You’re all going home, either alive or dead,” he said.
The ICE-chartered flight that took off from Mesa, Ariz., on April 3 carried 85 Bangladeshis, Indians and Nepalis. They had reached the end of a long, unlikely journey to the United States.
They were among thousands of international migrants whose numbers are now surging across Latin America, taking advantage of travel routes and smuggling networks forged over decades by Latino immigrants destined for the U.S.
Nearly all had started in Brazil and snaked north for months, braving dense forests, roiling waters, bandits and gang-infested towns before arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border. Some attempted to sneak in illegally and were caught; others surrendered to authorities, requesting asylum.
South Asians have become some of the biggest users of this expanding immigration pipeline. In the 11 months ending in August 2016, at least 4,060 Bangladeshis, Indians, Nepalis and Pakistanis traveled to the U.S. along this route, compared with just 225 seven years earlier, according to Customs and Border Protection statistics. Of those, 3,604 were arrested while crossing illegally, nearly a fourfold increase from 2012. Continue reading this article
The holidays are tough for families when there is an empty spot at the table, particularly so when that person was killed in a preventable crime by an illegal alien. The Washington Times reminded its readers of the costs of open borders on its Friday front page:
So crime victim families will soon have a friend in the White House, unlike now. The Roots work to keep Sarah’s killer in the news in hopes of his eventual apprehension, and they are confident the Trump administration will initiate policies that will help prevent other illegal aliens from murdering innocent Americans.
Daughter killed by illegal alien in tragedy without justice
COUNCIL BLUFFS, Iowa — There was a time when Scott Root and Michelle Wilson-Root looked forward to Christmas, but not this year.
Their 21-year-old daughter, Sarah Root, was killed Jan. 31 by Eswin Mejia, an illegal immigrant from Honduras accused of plowing into the back of her vehicle as he street-raced while drunk in Omaha, Nebraska. He skipped bail. Nearly a year later, he remains a fugitive.
For the Roots, this is the first Christmas without her, their first since the tragedy put them on a path with President-elect Donald Trump, who brought national attention to the case as part of his call during the election campaign for a crackdown on illegal immigration.
The Roots and their 25-year-old son, Scott Jr., met with and campaigned for Mr. Trump in Iowa. His Nov. 8 victory was their victory, too. That doesn’t make Christmas any easier.
“It’s going to suck,” said Mr. Root, his blank face a contrast to the cheerful green and red decorations at the local Starbucks. “Just like Thanksgiving sucked. Empty.”
It’s not hard to see why Sarah Root’s death resonated with Mr. Trump. The day before she was killed, Sarah graduated with a bachelor’s degree from Bellevue University, where she carried a 4.0 GPA while working full time at Walgreens.
The 19-year-old driver, also known as Edwin Mejia, had a blood alcohol content of 0.241, three times the legal limit, when his truck rear-ended her Oldsmobile Bravada SUV. Despite Mejia’s history of missing court dates, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement refused to put a hold on him.
Charged with vehicular homicide, Mejia posted the required $5,000 of the $50,000 bond set by a Nebraska judge and fled. He has been added to ICE’s most-wanted list, although there is no word on his whereabouts.
The case soon came to symbolize a perfect storm of judicial and bureaucratic indifference. Even ICE Deputy Director Daniel Ragsdale acknowledged in a letter to Iowa and Nebraska Senate Republicans that “Edwin Mejia should be in custody.”
“The killer of our child is gone,” said Mr. Root. “The judge has no accountability. The federal government, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said he wasn’t an enforcement priority. Now he’s on the top 10 of the ICE list, so he is a priority, but there’s no federal money to catch him. Zero.”
From a political standpoint, the Roots were in the right place at the right time — Iowa, in the middle of a Republican presidential primary.
They connected with Mr. Trump in February and threw their support behind him as he bashed the Obama administration for allowing Mejia to slip through the cracks, first after he entered country as an unaccompanied minor in 2013 and then for refusing to detain him.
“I’ve met Sarah’s beautiful family. But to this administration, their amazing daughter was just one more American life that wasn’t worth protecting,” Mr. Trump said in his July 21 acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention. “One more child to sacrifice on the altar of open borders.” Continue reading this article
Friday’s San Jose Mercury News featured a front-page story informing readers that illegal aliens living amongst us wish that they could be a part of the political process.
As we have noticed, illegal aliens are always complaining about the nation they invaded, despite the fact that they are enriched by the liberal government arguably more than the citizens. The illegal moochers receive an array of benefits funded by the unwilling taxpayer, including free-to-them healthcare, food stamps, subsidized housing, education for the kiddies, etc.
But that’s not enough — it’s never enough. They want to vote.
Illegal alien Mayela Razo, pictured below, complains that she cannot vote in the upcoming election, but hopes that the “Latino community” will “incite change” — or something like that. Readers see an English translation of her remarks in Spanish.
The Murky News apparently believes that illegal aliens participation in voter registration drives and get out the vote activities is a fine expression of civic engagement. Presumably the diverse persons being targeted will mostly vote against Donald Trump, who believes immigration anarchy must stop.
Mayela Razo can’t vote in the presidential election come November. But she’s making sure those who can cast a ballot do, even offering to drive friends and family members to the polls on election night.
It’s a privilege that Razo, who is undocumented, wishes she had.
“Although I can’t vote, I’m aware of what’s going on in the election season,” said the 54-year-old San Jose resident in Spanish, who participates in voter registration drives with the immigrant rights organization, SIREN.
“It’s of concern to me because I, too, live in this country,” she said. “I want the Latino community to vote and be conscious of the fact that they can incite change.”
This political season has unleashed an unprecedented level of activism among many undocumented residents, who say fear and uncertainty have spurred them to act. People like Razo are canvassing streets, championing social media campaigns and manning phone banks to mobilize voters ahead of the election.
Undocumented residents have become a potent weapon in a polarizing election where immigration has been a focal point. Nonprofits and activist groups are using their voices in voter registration drives to remind people about the importance of voting. Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and fellow Democrat Sen. Bernie Sanders incorporated undocumented residents in their campaigns to get out the Latino vote. And for undocumented residents, getting others to vote presents a unique opportunity to be part of a political process that could determine their future in the United States. As the election nears, their desire to act grows.
It’s a phenomenon that’s largely driven by “Dreamers,” young adults brought to the U.S. illegally as children but raised as Americans. Continue reading this article
As promised by the fairness-challenged Democrats at the DNC, Monday’s convention proceedings included unlawful foreigners portrayed as wonderful not-quite Americans, whose striving for full membership has been long thwarted by mean-spirited Republicans.
One special person so honored by the Democrats was Astrid Silva, a 28-year-old Mexican who was brought here as a child, making her a “dreamer.”
(Astrid was preceded on the stage by Karla and Francisca Ortiz, an illegal alien mother and her US-born anchor daughter who worries she might “come home and I find it empty” — so heart-tuggy!)
Astrid’s yarn was classic sob story, depicting a hard-working family struggling to reach America across those pesky borders:
“When I was four years old, my mother and I climbed into a raft, and we crossed the river to join my father in America in search of a better life. All I had was a little doll.”
What an image! How can meanie border supporters keep out such nice people? There’s only seven billion more where they came from.
“Dreamers” are another scheme of the democrats to obliterate law and borders. Under Dreamer legislation, anyone who entered illegally under age 16 could eventually “earn” citizenship and then chain migrate their parents a few years later.
Break the law: get rewarded. It’s the Democrat way, at least for their chosen people.
As promised, the Republican convention welcomed crime victims of illegal aliens to tell their stories of preventable suffering, which reflects Donald Trump’s interest in a topic the liberal open borders media prefers to overlook. Three parents told the convention audience how their sons were killed by illegal aliens who should have been deported but weren’t.
Sabine Durden appeared on Fox News the following day to talk more about her son and how government lawlessness endangers all Americans.
SABINE DURDEN: Dominic was 30 years old and he was an incredible spirit, incredible man, the kind of man you would want for a son-in-law. He was on his way to work on his motorcycle to the 911 dispatch center and as he drove down the street, about two miles from the house, an illegal alien without a license without registration, without insurance, drove up the street and turned in front of him and hit him so hard that he threw him into a wall right there on the sidewalk. He died instantly. Continue reading this article
It’s been a good couple days for national sovereignty. The Brexit referendum passed, against all polls and bookie forecasts, which begins divorce proceedings between Britain and the unelected European Union superstate. In Washington, the Supreme Court rejected the president’s unconstitutional executive amnesty.
“Our Founders conceived of this country as a refuge for the world.”
Really? Does he think the Founders fought a seven-year revolutionary war and set up a whole new country so the rest of the world could have a really comfy safe space?
Actually, the Constitution said that the purpose of the founding was “to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” There’s no mention of a “refuge” for auslanders.
The leftist view is that America is too rich, and middle-class citizens should be taxed to the max to provide free stuff for illegal aliens.
So it’s a good thing that the Supreme Court rejected Obama’s overreach of executive authority. However, it is concerning that four members of the nation’s top court apparently think it’s okay for the president to make law, which is Congress’ job and a basic item of the separation of powers.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott made a similar point about the court’s ruling:
President Obama lost his bid to kick-start his deportation amnesty Thursday after the Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4, keeping in place a lower court’s injunction, nixing the policy for the rest of Mr. Obama’s tenure and igniting political and legal debates that will carry on well beyond.
Mr. Obama said the ruling “takes us further from the country we aspire to be,” and vowed to protect most illegal immigrants from deportation anyway, saying his discretionary powers remain intact.
But the decision is a devastating blow to his hopes of a legacy-building amnesty, known by the acronym DAPA, that would have granted as many as 5 million illegal immigrants a stay of deportation and the keys to a more normal life in the U.S.: work permits and Social Security numbers enabling them to obtain driver’s licenses and other taxpayer benefits.
The ruling could have been even worse. Had Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February, still been on the court, Mr. Obama would likely have lost in a 5-4 decision that could have spanked him on broad constitutional grounds and imposed limits on future presidents, analysts said.
Instead, the tie decision leaves in place rulings by a district judge in Texas and by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that Mr. Obama broke the law when he claimed he had the categorical power to grant “deferred action” to nearly half of the illegal immigrants in the country. Continue reading this article
Six years ago Bernardino Hernandez boarded a plane to Mexico City with not much — his high school yearbook, a printer and his college copy of “Thomas More’s Magician,” a novel about creating a utopian community in 16th century Mexico.
He had recently graduated from UC Davis, but he felt limited by his lack of legal status in the United States. Hernandez was 21 years old and unsure whether he’d ever reach his potential in a country that he’d called home since he was a toddler but that now wouldn’t allow him to work legally.
Before he departed, his disapproving father gave him $1,000 in cash but warned him, “I won’t pay for a coyote to bring you back.”
Though he gave up on his American dream in the U.S., he is now living it in Mexico.
Hernandez, 27, is at the helm of a translation company he launched last fall, leading a team of 15 linguists who offer services in nearly two dozen languages to multiple businesses, including eight transnational companies. Continue reading this article
The other trend that showed up in the hearing was the administration’s growing intention to insult and endanger Americans in every way possible during its final year, in this instance creating an even more chaotic, dangerous border. Welcome ISIS and other enemies!
Fox News interviewed House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte on Thursday to sort out what the subcommittee learned:
JENNA LEE: The immigration issue is a big one on the campaign trail and was also the subject of a subcommittee hearing today on Capitol Hill: lawmakers examining illegal immigration into the United States, specifically along the southwest border. More than 100,000 families making that journey since 2014 and despite a dip in January, some say the United States isn’t doing enough to get the numbers under control for good.
BRANDON JUDD (President of the National Border Patrol Council): Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions. There are little to no consequences for breaking the laws, and that fact is well known in other countries. If government agencies like DHS or CBP are allowed to bypass Congress by legislating through policy, we might as well abolish our immigration laws altogether.
LEE: A person who was there today joining us is House Judiciary Committee Chairman and Virginia Congressman Bob Goodlatte — it’s great to have you on the program . . . what do you think is the big headline that came out of the subcommittee today?
BOB GOODLATTE: I think the big headline that came out of the subcommittee should be that as we watch Iowa, New Hampshire and beyond, we need a President of the United States who is committed to enforcing our immigration laws, because this hearing made it very plain that this president is not enforcing the laws. Remember the great border surge of two summers ago? Well guess what — it never stopped. . . .
The projections for this entire fiscal year are higher than they were in 2014, and there’s a reason for that. The word has spread back to Central America and other places in the world for that matter that we’re not enforcing immigration laws, and that’s exactly what we heard from the Border Patrol agent that you just showed a clip of, and in fact he told us today — this was the real blockbuster news — that because the administration has been embarrassed by the number of people who do not return for their hearings after they’re so-called caught and then released into the interior of the country, they’ve ordered the Border Patrol agents to stop arresting them in the first place. Instead of enforcing the law they said, well stop even detaining them, then we won’t have this problem of them not coming back to the hearing because there’s hearing to begin with. Unbelievable. . .
The president of the United States needs to enforce the laws. He needs to announce very clearly here and in Central America that the laws are going to be enforced and that people should not be encouraged to make this long dangerous trip.
Sternly worded memo on official House of Representatives stationery to follow.
The Obama administration has revived the maligned illegal immigrant “catch-and-release” policy of the Bush years, ordering Border Patrol agents not to even bother arresting and deporting many new illegal immigrants, the head of the agents’ labor union told Congress on Thursday.
Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, said Homeland Security was embarrassed by the number of illegal immigrants not showing up for their deportation hearings, but instead of cracking down on the immigrants, the department ordered agents not to arrest them in the first place — meaning they no longer need to show up in court in the first place.
Mr. Judd said the releases are part of President Obama’s “priorities” program, which says he’s only worried about illegal immigrants who came across after Jan. 1, 2014. Mr. Judd said illegal immigrants without serious criminal convictions on their record only have to claim they came before 2014 — without even needing to show proof — in order to be released without ever being arrested.
“Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions,” Mr. Judd testified to the House Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee. “That fact is well known in other countries.”
Customs and Border Protection, which oversees the Border Patrol, did not have an immediate comment on Mr. Judd’s testimony. The White House also declined to comment, with spokesman Josh Earnest saying he hadn’t seen the testimony.
Mr. Judd and Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies, said criminal cartels are particularly astute at exploiting the Obama administration’s policies, and have specifically recruited and sent tens of thousands of children to flood the border in order to distract agents and create new chances to smuggle drugs across.
Tens of thousands of unaccompanied illegal immigrant children from Central America, and tens of thousands more families traveling together, have surged to the southwestern border in the last few years, overwhelming the administration’s ability to handle them. Continue reading this article
Immigrant-sending nations have a problem with Donald Trump and the possibility that pushing their unskilled persons and criminals into stupid-generous America may shrink. They are miffed that Obasma’s open borders could shut to a degree, leaving some with a decreased remittance haul of fewer billions of dollars. (The United States is the major remittance-sending country, with $56 billion strip-mined in 2014 by immigrants and illegal aliens.)
The Washington Times did a world roundabout, gathering up quotes from interested persons (mostly critical) that ranged from angry to downright insulting.
For example, Dubai entrepreneur and television celebrity Mohamed Parham al Awadhi remarked:
“Look at flourishing cities like New York or San Francisco and how communities have lived together since their foundation. Middle Eastern, Asian, African, European and Latin American immigrants and refugees are not new phenomena. They’ve been assimilating with U.S. culture and living side by side with their fellow Americans.”
Funny, I remember Muslims’ effect on New York City differently.
On September 11, 2001, 19 Muslim jihadists from abroad killed nearly 3,000 Americans using hijacked passenger plane suicide attacks on New York and Washington.
As he has surged to the top of the polls in the Republican presidential primary race, Donald Trump has targeted Muslims, Mexicans and Asians as threats to national security and the economy.
Around the world, they don’t always appreciate it.
“Trump’s comments only propagate a perception of migrants and Mexicans that I know is not true and that outrages me,” said Nancy Landa, a member of Los Otros Dreamers, a Mexican advocacy group for deportees.
To an unusual degree world leaders and foreign populations appear to be monitoring closely the ins and outs of the American primary season, and the clear focus of much of the fascination is Mr. Trump and his unexpected success to date in the GOP primary. The Donald has already been the subject of parliamentary debate in Britain on whether he should be banned from the country for his inflammatory rhetoric, and foreign leaders find themselves forced to prepare their talking points when asked about prospective relations with a Trump administration.
Pressed recently on CNN for his thoughts on Mr. Trump’s call for a temporary ban on all Muslim travel to the U.S., Jordan’s King Abdullah took the traditional diplomatic exit ramp: “You’re into an election cycle, so I don’t think it’s fair for you to ask a foreign leader to express his opinion on candidates in your country running for election.”
But the restrictions don’t hold for foreign pundits, parliamentarians and ordinary citizens observing from afar one of the more disruptive U.S. campaigns in recent memory.
Unsurprisingly, the current gathering of international heavyweights at the Davos World Economic Forum has not been kind to Mr. Trump or his agenda opposing trade deals, freer immigration and open borders.
“I’d be happier with a more welcoming integration,” Chilean Finance Minister Rodrigo Valdes told the Reuters news service recently. “It is uncontroversial to say that integration of markets, of trade is a good thing, and this rhetoric does not help that.” Continue reading this article
Breitbart (normally a fine news source) seemed surprised that a dim administration apparatchik, ICE Director Sarah Saldana, recently remarked during a hearing that an amnesty for millions of foreign lawbreakers was the price required for any kind of immigration enforcement.
Actually the devil’s bargain of no enforcement is the same old lawless crap and not new at all. In 2010 then-Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) noted at a local town hall that during a private meeting with the President, Obama had said that precise thing:
KYL: “The problem is, he (Obama) said, if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.”
Fortunately, the video of that statement still resides on the internets:
Plus, the appearance of the video kicked up a minor kerfuffle at the time, complete with denials from the palace:
The White House on Monday denied Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl’s claim that President Barack Obama told him privately that he would not work to secure the border unless it was part of a comprehensive immigration reform package.
In a video that started circulating among conservative blogs over the weekend, the Arizona Republican is seen telling supporters in North Phoenix that in a private meeting in the Oval Office, Obama said “the problem” with border enforcement measures is that “if we secure the border then [Republicans] won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.” [. . .]
President Obama’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director tells lawmakers that no consequences are planned for sanctuary cities until Congress first passes “comprehensive immigration reform.” Sarah Saldaña testified before a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on criminal alien violence.
After hearing emotional testimony from families torn apart by illegal immigrant murderers, Republican members of Congress grilled two administration witnesses: Leon Rodriquez, Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and Sarah Saldaña, Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Both Rodriquez and Saldaña have been tasked with carrying out President Obama’s executive amnesty for so-called DREAMers, which includes work permits and medical benefits for low-income illegal aliens funded by citizen taxpayers.
Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) repeatedly pressed Saldaña on why the Administration was taking no action against sanctuary jurisdictions that refuse to turn over dangerous criminal aliens from their prisons and jails to federal law officers. Saldaña replied that Congress would first have to pass “comprehensive immigration reform.”
Vitter: “This has been going on for years and you still are not prepared to say that there is ever going to be any negative consequence to those [sanctuary] jurisdictions. When is that going to change?”
Saldaña: “I presume when you all address comprehensive immigration reform; perhaps it can be addressed there.” [. . .]
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.