Open borders radicals protest immigration laws and borders, 2020. PHOTO: TWITTER
The radicalization of even the mainstream Left on immigration makes concessions—routine in prior amnesty proposals—unthinkable no
From The National Interest
By Mark Krikorian
January 29, 2021
The Biden administration made a show of proposing sweeping legislation that would legalize virtually all illegal aliens and enact a variety of measures to weaken immigration enforcement and increase legal immigration beyond the current level of about 1 million a year. This was no vague statement of principles—congressional staff received a fifty-nine-page, section-by-section summary of the bill.
In the midst of a devastating pandemic, a wrenching economic slowdown, and political instability, the White House signaled that its top priority is amnesty for illegal aliens.
But the bill has yet to be actually introduced in Congress. And it may never be.
That’s because, with an almost evenly divided Congress, it has no chance of passage. The bill was proposed on the president’s first day in office to satisfy a campaign pledge and as a gesture of solidarity with the party’s most radical anti-borders activists.
This is not to say there will be no congressional push for the tripartite immigration goals of the left (and its corporate and libertarian fellow-travelers): amnesty, hobbled enforcement, and more immigration. But the administration, congressional Democrats, and activists confessed to Politico recently that a series of smaller measures is more likely.
Or perhaps that should be “smaller”—because the downsized amnesties Democrats are likely to actually push are not small. They would give legal status to three, four, or even five million illegal aliens, more than were amnestied by the infamous 1986 law that was supposed to be a one-time measure. The Democrats’ priority-one illegals, as it were, include:
1. Adults who came as minors—the so-called Dreamers, including that subset who received DACA, the Obama administration’s amnesty-lite program to provide work permits and Social Security numbers, but not a path to citizenship;
2. Recipients of various “temporary,” but repeatedly renewed, statuses (TPS and DED), granted to people already here illegally when some sort of natural or man-made disaster strikes their home countries. Like the DACA recipients, these people have the meat and potatoes of amnesty—work permits and Social Security numbers—but only through statute can they get the dessert of a green card and eventual citizenship;
3. So-called “essential workers” such as farm workers.
While ten Republicans could probably be found in the Senate to back some of these measures, even the most pusillanimous among them would demand some kind of meaningful strengthening of enforcement in return.
“Meaningful” is the operative word here; the days of giving the Border Patrol a few drones and calling it enforcement are over. For proposals that would legalize one-third to one-half of the illegal population to have any hope of gaining traction, they would have to include, at least, things like mandatory use of E-Verify (the online system to check the legal status of new hires is currently voluntary), and a prohibition on state and local sanctuary policies that shield foreign-national criminals from the immigration consequences of their law-breaking.
The radicalization of even the mainstream Left on immigration makes such concessions—routine in prior amnesty proposals—unthinkable now.
So, if Congress is likely to be the source of sound and fury signifying nothing on immigration, what is in the cards? Executive actions.
President Joe Biden is following in the footsteps of his two predecessors by focusing on the use of executive authority to make what changes he can. He has decreed an ostensibly temporary ban on deportations—though Republicans, having learned from the last four years of relentless lawfare against Trump, have succeeded for now in getting a federal judge to temporarily put that decree on hold.
Biden also lifted the so-called “Muslim ban,” which was, in reality, a qualified prohibition on visa issuance to citizens of countries (not all of them majority Muslim) whose governments are unable or unwilling to provide us information to allow the visa applicants to be vetted.
A third decree, like the others issued on the new president’s first day in office, halted construction on the border wall. This has left gaps in the fence, contracts in limbo, and stacks of expensive building materials piled up on the ground.
More decrees are expected, including a dramatic increase in refugee admissions; a move to make it easier for people likely to be dependent on welfare to get green cards;.. read the rest at thenationalinterest.org
Longstanding (2006 – Gov Kemp voted for it as a state senator) state law (OCGA 42-4-14) requires jailers to check the immigration status of incoming foreign prisoners. “If the foreign national is determined to be an illegal alien, the keeper of the jail or other officer shall notify the United States Department of Homeland Security, or other office or agency designated for notification by the federal government.”
Excerpt: “While Sheriff Owens – a former Cobb County policeman – is certainly free to smear his fellow law enforcement officers with accusations of profiling, he should understand that it’s illegal aliens who are deported and that removal is the punishment for illegal immigration, not traffic violations.”
Note: The below column was originally posted on the subscription news outlet Insider Advantage Georgia website
By D.A. King
In 2011, Aurelio Mayo Perez, an illegal alien, was booked into the Cobb County jail for no driver’s license but released due to an immigration enforcement reduction edict from then-President Barack Obama. Two years later, Mayo Perez was charged with aggravated child molestation and rape. The name of the ten-year old girl he was convicted of repeatedly molesting is not available.
Sheriffs Craig Owens, Cobb County (L) and Keebo Taylor, Gwinnett County (R). Photo WSB TV/Twitter
Last week, newly sworn Cobb County Sheriff Craig Owens held an elaborate press conference packed with invited anti-enforcement activists and proudly announced his termination of the 287(g) program. The Marietta Daily Journal described the event’s big finish with “…as the event ended, and a mariachi band began to play, the mood in the room was decidedly celebratory. The new sheriff even took to the floor and waltzed for a moment, reveling in his audience’s approval.” Cobb County Deputy Sheriff Loren Lilly – killed in a 2007 traffic crash by an unlicensed illegal alien driver – was unable to attend.
Democrat Commission Chairwoman Lisa Cupid pronounced Owens’ decision “bold, necessary, and overdue.” Cobb’s new District Attorney, Flynn Broady weighed in with “this is going to make our community safer.” We recommend reading the entire MDJ report
Created by congress in 1996, and signed into law by Bill Clinton, the voluntary 287(g) program is a tool used to expand the authority of local law enforcement to locate and report to ICE illegal aliens, usually in county jails. It’s a deterrent. Then-Senator Joe Biden voted in favor of passage.
The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports Owens claims “the program morphed into one that profiled immigrants through traffic stops, which resulted in them being deported on misdemeanor charges.” While Sheriff Owens – a former Cobb County policeman – is certainly free to smear his fellow law enforcement officers with accusations of profiling, he should understand that it’s illegal aliens who are deported and that removal is the punishment for illegal immigration, not traffic violations.
Jose Alfaro-Contraras, an illegal alien from El Salvador, was one of the gunmen in an April, 2015 armed robbery of the owner of a check-cashing store in Duluth. A year earlier, Alfaro-Contraras had been in the Gwinnett County jail on a shoplifting charge. He was released because “minor crime.”
In Gwinnett, on his first day in office, Sheriff Keybo Taylor made his enforcement policy clear when he quit the 287(g) program: “What we will not be doing is notifying ICE of anybody’s immigration status in the jail or any of our facilities…” said Taylor at his own presser. He told a local NPR interviewer 287(g) is slanted towards “people of color.”
“So basically, what that program started to do was target, uh, you know, people of color that were in this country that’s undocumented, so, you know, it became, you know, a racist issue for me…”,
He says he would rather focus on gang members. I was curious, so I checked with experts on gangs in Gwinnett and the skin color concern Taylor expressed. But on that topic Sheriff Taylor does have concerns about borders “…crime and criminals…they don’t, they do not respect borders, so, you know, it’s nothing to come from Atlanta to Gwinnett County…” says Taylor. Indeed.
In print and radio interviews, both sheriffs have done a remarkable job of learning and adhering to the anti-287(g) talking points distributed by the far-left. Below are some of those tips from a 2008 ACLU ‘toolkit.’
‘How to oppose 287(g) agreements in your state or locality’
Always describe how police enforcement of immigration laws endangers public safety for everyone.
Assert that local police of immigration laws will result in widespread racial profiling.
Assert that immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government.
Assert that police resources are stretched thin already.
Is long-standing Ga. law being enforced?
Attention Georgia prosecutors, including Flynn Broady: Independent of 287(g), longstanding (2006) state law (OCGA 42-4-14) requires jailers to check the immigration status of incoming foreign prisoners. “If the foreign national is determined to be an illegal alien, the keeper of the jail or other officer shall notify the United States Department of Homeland Security, or other office or agency designated for notification by the federal government.”
Kevin Riley, Editor in Chief, the Atlanta Journal Constitution (AJC). Photo: AJC
The below LTE was sent Jan 19, 2021. The AJC has abandoned all pretense of honest journalism and this was sent merely to illustrate that fact. I did not expect to see it in print and I did not expect a retraction. The AJC did not even edit their online version. I sent it to the entire leadership team and to the publisher, Donna B. Hall – who did not reply.
Donna B. Hall – Publisher, AJC. Photo: AJC
Dear editor,
Request for retraction
In the entirely unbalanced, celebratory report on Cobb County Sheriff Craig Owens ending the lifesaving 287(g) program, the AJC tells readers as a statement of fact “the program originally began to remove terrorists, as well as other violent criminals, from neighborhoods across the country. However, Owens said the program morphed into one that profiled immigrants through traffic stops, which resulted in them being deported on misdemeanor charges.”
While Sheriff Owens – a former Cobb County policeman – is certainly free to smear his fellow law enforcement officers with accusations of profiling, the AJC statement is easily proven false. It’s yet another case of agenda-driven misinformation.
The law passed by congress establishing 287(g) program never limited it to applying only to terrorists or illegal aliens who were arrested for violent crimes. The reality is authority includes “to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States:”
You must be logged in to post a comment.