A Closer Look at the Democrats’ Immigration Stances
Democraticpolicy positions on immigration bear serious analysis at this point, because theyare now producing pain, suffering and death every day.
Recentreports that seven people in Washington State have died because of crimesperpetrated by illegal immigrants who would have been removed but for thatstate’s “sanctuary laws” are just the tip of the iceberg. Americans every dayare dying because states will not support federal immigration enforcement andremoval operations. Response from Speaker Pelosi?
Moreover,intending illegal immigrants posing as “asylum seekers” are dying in the desertand rivers because of policies that Democrats have championed to incentivize theuse of minor children to get special treatment at the border. Laws passed and earlier-approved courtsettlements require that children be handled in a manner that encourages theiruse by cartels and traffickers.
Today’simmigration chaos began with the calculated decision by Democrats – led byIllinois Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) – to begin isolating minor children asa subpopulation to try to elicit sympathy for a political agenda. It began in2001, when the “DREAM Act,” or Development,Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act, was cooked up at a time when 9/11hijackings made it politically impossible to push another universal blanketamnesty. This bill provided an amnestyfor those persons brought here as minors, regardless of their age at the timethe bill was enacted into law.
Although such a proposal would obviously beseen as an incentive for people to bring young children, Senator Durbin quicklyrealized that by using children as political tools, it would galvanize his baseand advance his political agenda: To create division and dissent around theidea that U.S. immigration laws have legitimacy and purpose.
Various version of the DREAM Act drifted alonguntil former President Obama ratified portions of it administratively with theDACA program in 2012. Both proposalsremain highly controversial.
True to form, Senator Durbin has never variedfrom this tactic, even at the expense of making what he should believe isprogress. He could have gotten the DREAM Act passed many times had he beenwilling to compromise and provide proper reforms in exchange. Instead, as he does today, he finds oneexcuse after another to never give an inch: He does not want to give up theFaustian bargain he entered into nearly two decades ago. Just read his Twitter feed to see it inaction: Attack, attack, attack.
The logical conclusion of what began as apolitical ploy in 2001 has now been reached. By reflexively opposing one form ofenforcement after another, we now find that a proposal by the TrumpAdministration to execute Final Orders of Removal (Deportation) against personswho have already been found deportableis opposed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her caucus. Indeed, she now says being “out of status” isnot a proper basis for removal. Since when? Has she read the law?
Keep in mind these are people who have not only broken our immigration laws (and invariably quite a few others along the way), they have thumbed their noses at our judicial system by ignoring a lawful departure order after having their day in court. In other words, they have had their due process, and refused to respect our system of borders and laws at any level.
It is these people that the Democratic Leadershipnow wishes to shield from the consequences of their outrageous behavior. This can only be seen for what it is: A fullscale, frontal assault on the legitimacy of the nation’s immigration and bordercontrols. It is a full blown crisis of unfathomable dimensions. Our national self-determination is slippingfrom our grasp.
The failure of Congress to act demonstrates that the nation is at an inflection point: When a democracy is unable to update its policies to reflect real world operations of its laws in a manner calculated to ensure its long-term preservation, it has a real problem. This choice is ours – national self-determination, or a continued slide into a slumbering mediocrity. I choose the former.