It’s no secret worldwide that the United States is suffering a terrible recession illustrated by the worst level of joblessness since the 1930s. Fifteen million is the official unemployment number, but many additional American citizens are working part-time or have given up looking.
Nevertheless, illegal aliens from Ireland continue to arrive to steal American jobs, like they were entitled to do so because of the history of Irish immigration (legal) to this country.
Yet the illegal Irish think it is totally swell to impose themselves on the American job market and steal employment that by law belongs to US citizens. Arrogant Paddy-pests do it largely because there is no jail time for job theft; the worst punishment is a free ride home.
In addition, they can hook in to existing social networks to find work quickly — just like illegal Mexicans and other invasive moochers.
What’s needed is national expansion of Operation Streamline, a Zero-Tolerance program which started in the Del Rio Sector and has been hugely successful. Rather than being held briefly and then released to try again, illegal border crossers are prosecuted and jailed. Funny how well punishment works as a deterrent.
Since the Irish generally enter with temp visas and then never leave, universal workplace eligibility checks are needed, with the application of Operation Streamline to those found to be illegal aliens.
The number of people travelling from Ireland to New York to find work is rising, according to the city’s Irish community leaders.
Faced with 13.5% unemployment at home, many young people are travelling in on tourist visas and picking up jobs as undocumented workers in the construction or hospitality industries.
Sky News Online spoke to three Irish community and immigration centres in areas with large Irish populations, and all said there is strong anecdotal evidence that numbers have risen in the past 12 months.
Paul Finnegan, executive director of the New York Irish Centre in Queens, said requests for advice and assistance have increased tenfold in the past year. [CONTACT -- phone: (718) 482-0909; Email form]
“I talk about the fact that pubs, which are always gathering places for the Irish and many other nations, in recent years have seen a new surge of crowds going to them around New York,” he said.
“I look around and I know that there are young men and women there that would not have the opportunity to get a green card.
“I’m not saying that they’ve overstayed their visitor’s visa, I’m just saying that I’m observing huge numbers that I have not seen in before.”
Vanessa, who did not want to be fully identified, came into the States on a tourist visa and now works illegally in a restaurant in New York.
She told Sky News Online: “I got laid off at home from my job so I decided to come over here because I knew that I’d get work here even though I wouldn’t be legal.
“I had to come away and get work because I wasn’t willing to stay at home on the dole. I was at college for four years and got my degree, and I just couldn’t face not being in work.
“I have a couple of friends who are left in Ireland now and they just feel like they’re being left behind, so they’re saving their social welfare to flee the country.”
By September 2009 more people were leaving Ireland than arriving, and by April 2010 net migration was the highest since the recession-hit 80s.
The best available official estimate for numbers of Irish in New York, both legal and undocumented, comes from the US Census Bureau, which put the figure at 29,647 in 2009.
Orla Kelleher, the executive director of the Aisling Irish Community Centre based in Queens and The Bronx, thinks the true number is probably much higher.
“Based on what we are seeing there has been a big increase,” she said.
“The vast majority of the well established Irish community are here legally, but there are always those who are willing to take risks with their immigration status.”
Ciaran Staunton owns a well-known Irish bar in Manhattan and lobbies the US government to improve immigration laws for Irish people.
“Everyone in Ireland has relations here and most of them will get work as soon as they arrive because there’s someone looking out for them.
“In the last number of months we’ve seen a big influx of young Irish people.
“They’ve said ‘Well, we’ve two choices. The choice is either stay in Ireland, legal, unemployed, with no certainty for the future, or get a job, chance our arm in America, perhaps undocumented, but as most of our friends have jobs, let’s come over there and try it’.”
See? Illegal Irish think they are so special that unemployed Americans should just get out of their way to paychecks.
Blogger Mickey Kaus checks out what the open-borders gang is thinking about their recent wipe-out. The DREAM Act was supposed to be an easy win, and was left until the Lame Duck when the Democrats’ remaining shards of power remained. The Great Obama had promised to amnesty millions of hopeful illegal foreigners in his first year with the help of huge Democrat majorities, but somehow he forgot, and rewarding lawbreakers similarly slipped his mind in most of the second year of his administration.
Some of the DREAMer individuals with whom Kaus spoke sounded ready to go for “enforcement first” as a way to reach their stated goal, the legalization of tens of millions. (That’s why the phrase “enforcement first” should alarm and alert any defender of America. “Enforcement only” is the way to go, period.)
Somehow they neglected to mention the other goal, that of “increased flow” to maintain the hispanization of the United States. It’s normal for some assimilation to occur over several generations and the Raza gang wants to prevent that.
Hispanic supremacist and broadcaster Jorge Ramos voiced the hopes of many: “Latinos are not only the largest minority right now, but eventually we will be the majority in the United States, and the process is well underway.”
So it’s doubtful that hardcore reconquista Mexicans have given up on their revanchist fantasies and accepted assimilation to American values and language. It’s only a strategy, as Kaus notes. Beware of Raza gangsters who sound reasonable, in other words.
In the wake of the defeat of the DREAM Act—long considered the immigrant legalization bill that would be easiest to pass—the once-confident “immigration reform” movement has entered an introspective, questioning phase. Activists are openly asking how their leaders, such as Rep. Luis Gutierrez, could have so misjudged the public mood as to lead them to near-total defeat. Many are even saying what was heretofore unthinkable: that it was arrogant for people who came into the country illegally, however appealing they are as individuals, to let themselves be seen as demanding legalization before their host citizenry was assured that the border would be secure against future illegal entry. These new voices increasingly argue that the fastest way to actually achieve legalization is to steal a page from their opponents and pursue a two-stage strategy: secure the border first, and only push for what the opponents call “amnesty” once anxieties about further waves of undocumented workers have been calmed.
“We tried to take a shortcut. It’s blocked,” one disappointed advocate said privately. “If we have to take the long way around, so be it.” In pursuit of this new approach, he and others plan to support, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, many of the “enforcement” ideas expected to be proposed by Republican lawmakers in the House— including a requirement that employers use E-Verify, an automated system, to check the immigration status of new hires.
Officials within the Obama administration are encouraging this approach, which they call “practical.” They say the president has come to realize that “enforcement first” gives him another opportunity to make common cause with Republicans without sacrificing his ultimate goal, which remains legalization. “It’s win-win-win,” one White House aide said on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak on the subject. “We put points on the board, the Republicans solve their Latino problem, and the immigrants eventually get to be legal.”
The aide noted that the new approach would have been adopted yers ago, but a many Latino activists were unwilling to take any steps—like mandating E-Verify or building a border fence—that might cut off a continuing movement of undocumented Spanish-speaking immigrants from Mexico and Central America, and also cut off those already here from their homelands. “It was a nationalistic thing, a family thing, an ethnic thing, a political power thing. You know, “Venceremos!”" admitted one activist who had resisted the new approach. “But now we are thinking more realistically. We need legalization and this is the fastest way.” He expects the movement’s new thinking …
The family of murdered Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry agrees with the majority of Americans that the border is dangerously insecure, despite the bleatings of the administration. Agent Terry was killed in an Arizona gun battle with Mexican bandits earlier this month.
Terry’s funeral was held on Wednesday, and his family gathered to say good-bye and also spoke to the media. They believe that Washington is not doing enough to end border lawlessness. They had nothing good to say about DHS boss Napolitano, who came to speak at the service and continued with her insulting lie that the border is “as secure now as it has ever been”.
LIVONIA, Mich. (KGUN9-TV) – Bag pipes and a somber procession with murdered border patrol agent Brian Terry’s flag draped coffin; they’re all the accoutrements for the funeral of a federal agent shot and killed while on patrol in Arizona’s southern desert.
But, not so typical was what Brian’s family had to say to KGUN9 the night before he was brought to his final resting place at Michigan Memorial Park. “I understand that Janet Napolitano called (Tuesday night). What did you say to her?” 9 On Your Side reporter Joel Waldman asked Brian Terry’s father, Kent.
“‘I said you gotta wake your man up in the White House,’” Kent responded. ”And she said, ‘He’s done more in the last two years than any other president.’”
But the Terrys told Waldman that they don’t buy it. Kent, step mom Carolyn, mom Josie, older brother Kent Jr., sisters Kelly and Michelle are all angry that their son and brother, Brian, died the way he did. They’re not shy about blaming President Obama’s administration for not doing enough, taking aim directly at Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano.
A giant sigh of relief was heard across the nation when the ghastly DREAM Act stealth amnesty for millions was defeated in the Senate. Another bullet aimed at America’s sovereignty and culture was dodged, due to the efforts of patriotic citizens.
California is $28 billion in debt, yet Brown (who is personally frugal) nevertheless intends to increase spending on illegal alien students, who cannot work legally after graduation. Brown’s priority makes zero fiscal sense, which shows how much he and the Democrats are joined at the hip with La Raza and the other anti-American, anti-sovereignty leftists.
Below, DREAMers demand amnesty as they march around Hollywood in colorful graduation costumes.
Incidentally, my dream is that immigration would be legal, controlled and greatly reduced.
Devastated by the Senate’s failure last week to grant them a path to citizenship, undocumented young people throughout California are vowing renewed activism to win legal immigration status if they attend college or serve in the military.
With the highest number of undocumented young people in the nation, California is already the epicenter for student advocacy on the issue and for legal breakthroughs granting them in-state tuition. Now the students — and their supporters — say they will train their sights on electoral change and a state legislative effort to give them access to college financial aid, which appears likely to succeed under newly elected Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown.
“We are still going to be pushing forward,” said Carlos Juarez, 21, a UCLA sociology major whose family brought him to the U.S. from Mexico when he was less than a year old.
In high drama last week, the House of Representatives passed a bill, known as the DREAM Act, that would have granted legal status to potentially hundreds of thousands of immigrants under age 30 who attend college or serve in the military. But in the Senate, the measure, formally the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, fell five votes short of advancing to the floor for a vote, as opponents attacked the bill as amnesty for lawbreakers.
Advocates are glum about the bill’s revival in the near term; Republicans, who overwhelmingly opposed it, will take control of the House of Representatives next month. But some say that such gloomy prognosticators may be in for a surprise.
Steve Kinney, a Republican pollster in Los Angeles, and Richard Land, a Republican who heads the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, said some Republicans are open to a narrower legalization program for students and military enlistees that would not include their families.
No Republican legislator has yet stepped forward with concrete proposals for a more limited DREAM Act. Rep. Lamar Smith (R- Texas), the incoming chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said border security would take precedence over any other immigration issue.
“It is pointless to talk about any new immigration bills that grant amnesty, no matter how narrow, until we secure the border, since such bills will only encourage more illegal immigration,” Smith said in a statement.
President Obama and Latino lawmakers agreed during a private meeting Tuesday that comprehensive immigration reform aimed at legalizing millions of undocumented residents would be all but impossible before the 2012 elections. Instead, they concurred on the goal of staving off punitive measures targeting illegal migrants.
Advocates are more hopeful on the state level. California, for instance, is expected to move forward with a state DREAM Act that would allow undocumented public college students to receive state or campus financial aid.
The Legislature this year approved a measure to allow such aid, but it was vetoed by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Brown, during gubernatorial debates this year, said he would have signed the bill into law.
This year, the state Supreme Court upheld a California policy that allows undocumented immigrant students who are state residents to pay the lower in-state tuition rates. But without financial aid, many students say they struggle to pay their way.
Sofia Campos, an undocumented UCLA student whose family brought her to the U.S. from their native Peru when she was 6, said such a change in state law would help her piece together the money to complete college, which she is funding through private scholarships, summer office work and babysitting. Lack of funds caused her to miss one quarter.
“With tuition ever increasing, it would give us more hope and a push to continue,” said Campos, a Los Angeles resident majoring in political science and global studies. Continue reading this article
The narcissist in the White House was very pleased with himself during his final press conference before Christmas. Obama thought the Lame Duck session went quite well indeed after his admitted “shellacking” on November 2.
Perhaps having around 70 departing, obedient Democrats (either voted out or retiring) contributed more to the alleged success than his personal brilliance. The President’s henchpersons Pelosi and Reid used their remaining power to ram through legislation that would never have passed the upcoming Congress, the one chosen by a dissatisfied electorate.
The December 22 press conference was more like a victory lap than a newsmaker event. The scribblers asked softball questions, starting with whether he thought of himself as the “Comeback Kid” because he had recently “racked up a lot of wins.” Such is the penetrating interrogation of the lapdog press.
Perhaps the most newsworthy moments occurred when BHO was quizzed by the CNN Espanol reporter, beginning with a festive “Feliz Navidad” and asking about immigration reform in the Congress. The President declared “my biggest disappointment was this DREAM Act vote.”
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. Good afternoon. I know everybody is itching to get out of here and spend some time with their families. I am, too. I noticed some of you colleagues have been reporting from Hawaii over the last week. But I just wanted to say a few words about the progress that we’ve made on some important issues over these last few weeks. [. . .]
Juan Carlos López.
Q Gracias, Presidente. Feliz Navidad.
THE PRESIDENT: Feliz Navidad.
Q Mr. President, you’ve been able to fulfill many of your promises. Immigration reform isn’t one of them. Just this last weekend, the DREAM Act failed cloture by five votes, and five Democrats didn’t support it; three Republicans did. How are you going to be able to keep your promise when the Republicans control the House when you haven’t been able to do so with Democrats controlling both the Senate and the House, and when Republicans say they want to focus on border security before they do anything on immigration?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me say, there are a number of things that I wanted to get accomplished that we did not get accomplished. For example, collective bargaining for firefighters and public safety workers — that was something that I thought was important. We didn’t get it done. I’m disappointed in that. I think we’re still going to have to figure out how we work on energy, and that’s an area that I want to immediately engage with Republicans to figure out.
But I will tell you, maybe my biggest disappointment was this DREAM Act vote. You know, I get letters from kids all across the country — came here when they were five, came here when they were eight; their parents were undocumented. The kids didn’t know — kids are going to school like any other American kid, they’re growing up, they’re playing football, they’re going to class, they’re dreaming about college. And suddenly they come to 18, 19 years old and they realize even though I feel American, I am an American, the law doesn’t recognize me as an American. I’m willing to serve my country, I’m willing to fight for this country, I want to go to college and better myself — and I’m at risk of deportation. Continue reading this article
The BBC has a reputation as being a fawning panderer to Muslims, with good reason. However the video report below is quite decent with its explanation of the brutality Christians face in Egypt, where 90 percent of the population is Muslim.
It is disturbing to hear the Coptic Christian shopkeeper describe his teenaged daughter’s kidnapping. She went out with friends for a pizza and never came back. She was apparently abducted by Muslims and forced into marriage with an older Islamic man.
Naturally, her parents are heartbroken that their child was stolen, not to mention that they have no legal recourse in the matter. The police will not help them because they are Christians in a Muslim society and are therefore not full citizens; they are dhimmis, as defined by sharia law. Many Muslims regard Christian girls as somehow available for them to steal, through the generosity of Allah.
Today’s headline is the long-awaited result of the 2010 US Census. Much of the establishment media has been obsessed with which states will gain or lose representatives, and indeed that is the Constitutional purpose of the decennial count.
To un-PC environmentalists like me, the important number is the total residents of this country. They are additional users of water and other natural resources, while we have no new sources of water and farmland is being paved over for subdivisions.
The big headline is this: America’s population as of April 1, 2010 was 308,745,538. This represents a 9.7 increase over the 2000 number. California grew by an even 10 percent, to more than 37 million.
The national rate of growth (9.7 percent) has slowed from 1990-2000’s 13.2 percent, but that has to do partially with the large base number, namely the 2000 population of 281,421,906. More important than the rate of growth is the numerical increase of one decade, i.e. 27,323,632. That’s a lot of consumers for resources that are estimated to be sustainable at an American population of 150 million.
More important to the well being of the nation is the growth of income and wealth per American, not the big total of additional residents. Average Americans are falling behind financially because of immigration and outsourcing, so the media doesn’t discuss that topic much.
There are big changes coming in the 112th Congress, and not a minute too soon. One welcome personnel change is Rep. Peter King becoming the Chair of the Homeland Security Committee, taking over from unserious Democrat Bennie Thompson.
On Monday the Congressman explained his intentions about the hearings:
Part of me is wondering who the panel speakers might be… Daniel Pipes? Robert Spencer?
On the other hand, Rep. King could just read from the hostile parts of the Koran, or show Geert Wilders’ 17-minute film Fitna. The documentary quotes certain verses from Islamic holy writings and from current Muslim leaders, then illustrates them in real life, e.g. “Allah is happy when non-Muslims get killed,” says a Muslim as the film shows the 2004 Madrid train bombing.
Now another item: will the hearings debate the vital issue of ending Muslim immigration? My humble suggestion: for improved national security, stop importing potential enemies.
In fact, King could invite realistic freedom fighter Geert Wilders to testify at the hearing;, the member of the Dutch Parliament lists ending Muslim immigration as something the West must do to ensure its survival.
Following is Rep King’s opinion piece from Sunday:
Earlier this month, I was elected by the House Republican Conference to be chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. I’ve made it clear that I’ll focus the committee on counterterrorism and hold hearings on a wide range of issues, including radicalization of the American Muslim community and homegrown terrorism.
I’ve received many expressions of support and congratulations from government leaders, police and fire officials, and ordinary citizens. But my selection has not been received with universal acclaim. This is nothing new – the unwarranted criticisms go back years.
To some in the strata of political correctness, I’m a pretty bad guy. To be blunt, this crowd sees me as an anti-Muslim bigot. A spokesman for the Committee on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) denounced me last year for making “bigoted remarks . . . about Muslims and mosques (that) have no place in national security discussions.”
In a 2006 CNN report about comments I’d made about Muslim leaders on Long Island, Paula Zahn said my charges were “causing a lot of outrage” before proceeding to asking me “Are you a Muslim hater?”
This, after a Newsday editorial assailed me for “playing with fire” and conducting a “holy war.” Newsday has since moved from moralistic condemnation to sorrowful rebuke, writing this fall: “We wish King was less given to bellicose broadsides about Muslims. Alienating loyal Muslim Americans won’t make us safer.”
So what’s the story that CAIR and the mainstream media aren’t telling you?
Before 9/11, few if any American politicians had a closer relationship with the Muslim community and its leadership than I did. During my first months in Congress in 1993, I traveled to the Balkans – including Bosnia, Macedonia and Kosovo – to support that region’s Muslims from aggression by Serbian Orthodox Christians. I was one of a bare handful of Republicans who supported President Bill Clinton’s military offensives in Bosnia in 1995 and Kosovo in 1998.
I attended the Islamic Center of Long Island (ICLI) in Westbury on a regular basis, visited socially with local Muslim leaders, had Muslim students intern in my office, and advocated for Pakistan’s position against India in Kashmir. Indeed, in 1995 the ICLI honored me for my “support of the Muslim community in general” and my “advocacy of human rights in Bosnia and Kashmir.”
In the days following 9/11, I made several television and radio appearances supporting American Muslims, saying that they had nothing to do with the attacks and were as loyal and patriotic as any Americans. I particularly warned that we could not do to Muslims what was done to Japanese-Americans after Pearl Harbor.
Even today I cannot begin to describe the disappointment, anger and outrage I felt when, barely a month after those attacks that killed so many hundreds of Long Islanders, prominent Long Island Muslim leaders were insisting there was no evidence that al-Qaida was responsible for the attacks – even saying it could have been the CIA, the FBI or the Zionists!
Even more troubling is that to this day, no Muslim leader has denounced those vile remarks. Nor did Newsday say a word about these slanders – no moral outrage or condemnation. No demand for an apology or even an explanation.
As I became more immersed in attempting to unravel the radical Islamic threat to our nation and our civilization, it became more and more obvious to me that the moral myopia of Long Island’s Muslim leaders and their apologists in the media was the rule – and that there were few exceptions.
Federal and local law enforcement officials throughout the country told me they received little or – in most cases – no cooperation from Muslim leaders and imams. Continue reading this article
Interestingly a grassroots group of French patriots has formed up to resist, calling themselves the French Defense League; in French, La Ligue de Défense Française. They seem to understand that immigration without assimilation is invasion (and much cheaper than mounting a traditional war). Muslim immigration is the worst of that category.
I hope the LDF members are serious. France is at war and needs a real resistance. The French Resistance of WWII had very distinguished heroes like Jean Moulin and Lucie Aubrac. The threat is no less today than during Nazi occupation in the 1940s. And American GIs won’t be marching in to the rescue.
The LDF recently posted a video statement that the illegal Muslim “prayers” in French streets must end:
Below is a video that shows how the “prayer” behavior has escalated to include loudspeakers and fencing, as of December 10, 2010, in the 18th District of Paris.
Can you imagine Muslims taking over a street near your home in such a manner? It is a completely hostile act. Being nice (or weak) toward Muslim immigrants results in worsening belligerence. Better not to admit them in the first place.
Did citizen activism get the French President’s attention about Islamic street takeovers? Perhaps. Marie le Pen has also raised the issue.
NICOLAS Sarkozy will take another lurch to the Right with a speech on New Year’s Eve calling Muslim prayers in the street “unacceptable”.
After his expulsions of gypsies and a crackdown on immigrant crime, the French President will warn that the overflow of Muslim faithful on to the streets at prayer time when mosques are packed to capacity risks undermining the French secular tradition separating state and religion.
He will doubtless be accused of pandering to the far Right: the issue of Muslim prayers in the street has been brought to the fore by Marine Le Pen, the charismatic new figurehead of the National Front, who compared it to the wartime occupation of France.
Her words provoked uproar on the Left, whose commentators took them as evidence that far from being the gentler face of the far Right, Ms Le Pen, 42, is no different from Jean-Marie, 82, her father, who has been accused of racism and Holocaust denial.
According to his aide, Mr Sarkozy agrees with the junior Le Pen that the street cannot be allowed to become “an extension of the mosque” as it does in some parts of Paris, which are closed to traffic because of the overflow of the faithful. Local authorities have declined to intervene, despite public complaints, because they are afraid of sparking riots.
“People overreacted to Marine Le Pen’s comments,” said the aide, referring to the furore in which she was accused of rabble-rousing racism. “She is right: this phenomenon is unacceptable.”
The tall, blonde Ms Le Pen is expected to succeed her father as head of the National Front at a party congress next month.
Her advance in the opinion polls reflects a trend all over Europe, where far-Right parties are benefiting from anti-immigrant sentiment and economic fears. As a more moderate voice than her father, Ms Le Pen is widely considered to be more effective and the nightmare scenario for Mr Sarkozy is that he might be knocked out of the race during the first round of the presidential election in 2012. The run-off would then be staged between the two first-round winners: Ms Le Pen and a Socialist candidate.
Something similar happened in 2002, when Jean-Marie Le Pen took advantage of a fractured Left to beat Lionel Jospin, the Socialist candidate, in the first round and ended up losing in the run-off against Jacques Chirac.
Marine Le Pen’s approval rating has risen to 33 per cent in recent weeks, according to one poll, only three points behind Mr Sarkozy’s, as she has criss-crossed the country articulating what a lot of older people believe: that France has been invaded by Muslims and betrayed by its elite. Continue reading this article
For years, the Raza open-borders gang has insisted on “comprehensive immigration reform” where all aspects would be jammed into one enormous bill that would have a mountain of amnesty and lots of loopholes in any attempted enforcement.
That’s my brief analysis. The New York Times sees it differently, and tucks in a little suggestion that the Great Obama might use his mighty executive power to create mass amnesty to please America-hating liberals and illegals. The idea shows how few cards the enemies of sovereignty have left to play after the 2010 election.
Below, entitlement-engorged illegal aliens demand still more taxpayer-subsidized education, because free-to-them K-12 was not enough to satisfy their desires.
The vote by the Senate on Saturday to block a bill to grant legal status to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrant students was a painful setback to an emerging movement of immigrants and also appeared to leave the immigration policy of the Obama administration, which has supported the bill and the movement, in disarray.
The bill, known as the Dream Act, gained 55 votes in favor with 41 against, a tally short of the 60 votes needed to bring it to the floor for debate. Five Democrats broke ranks to vote against the bill, while only three Republicans voted for it. The defeat in the Senate came after the House of Representatives passed the bill last week.
The result, although not unexpected, was still a rebuff to President Obama by newly empowered Republicans in Congress on an issue he has called one of his priorities. Supporters believed that the bill — tailored to benefit only immigrants who were brought here illegally when they were children and hoped to attend college or enlist in the military — was the easiest piece to pass out of a larger overhaul of immigration laws that Mr. Obama supports.
His administration has pursued a two-sided policy, coupling tough enforcement — producing a record number of about 390,000 deportations this year — with an effort to pass the overhaul, which would open a path to legal status for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants. Now, with less hope for any legalization measures once Republicans take over the House in January, the administration is left with just the stick.
Part of the administration’s strategy has been to ramp up border and workplace enforcement to attract Republican votes for the overhaul. The vote on Saturday made it clear that strategy has not succeeded so far.
Mr. Obama will now face growing pressure from immigrant and Latino groups to temper the crackdown and perhaps find ways to use executive powers to bring some illegal immigrants out of the shadows. Latino voters turned out in strength for the Democrats in the midterm elections, arguably saving their majority in the Senate.
The Republicans in the new Congress are especially keen on tough enforcement. The presumed incoming chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on immigration is Representative Steve King of Iowa, a vigorous opponent of legalization measures, which he rejects as amnesty for lawbreakers. Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, who will be chairman of the Judiciary Committee, is also an outspoken and well-versed opponent of such proposals.
Groups favoring reduced immigration cheered Saturday’s vote as a watershed victory marking the end of a period when they have been on the defensive. Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA, which lobbied hard against the bill, said the new Congress “has the strongest pro-enforcement membership” in at least 15 years.
“Now, we look forward to moving aggressively to offense,” Mr. Beck said.
During the last year, administration officials considered proposals to allow immigration authorities to use administrative powers to halt deportations of illegal immigrants who might have been eligible for legal status under the student bill. They also sought ways to ease deportations for other illegal immigrants with no criminal record.
Republican lawmakers criticized those proposals as “backdoor amnesty” and pledged to stop the administration from carrying them out.
The administration’s efforts to manage its policy dilemma played out this week. Speaking on Friday before the vote, John Morton, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the agency would continue the brisk pace of deportations, focusing on immigrants convicted of crimes. On the same day, the agency released from detention an 18-year-old Guatemalan student from Ohio, Bernard Pastor, granting him a one-year reprieve from deportation to continue his education. Continue reading this article
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.