Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Emperor Obama I
Emperor Obama I will announce his executive immigration order tomorrow night. To celebrate America’s descent into autocracy, I have commissioned a sculpture to be placed in the well of the Senate. It will serve as a stern reminder that the legislative branch is no longer relevant.
According to CNN, the announcement will be followed by a Friday celebration in Las Vegas. Might I recommend Caesar’s Palace?
Published in General
Thanks. Stolen. Or should I say “redistributed”….
No, they do not remember.
No, they didn’t know in the first place.
No, they don’t care.
No, they don’t pay nearly that close attention to the actual work of their legislators.
If a non-citizen can be convicted of a crime, then why wouldn’t the President be able to pardon them of that crime?
The pardon is only the first part of the tactic. It’s useless without the President ALSO having the authority to refrain from deporting them.
In two years, if the next president wants to deport them, that president won’t be able to use their previous law-breaking against them, because they will have been pardoned.
As I understand it, Congress has the authority to grant the President the authority to do things, but Congress cannot force the President to actually do them, according to the strict letter of the constitution.
So, since immigration law does not give the president the authority to naturalize anybody he wants, if he wants to make these people legal residents beyond his own tenure, he’ll have to get Congress to change the law.
As I understand it.
This raises a big question: Is the federal executive branch the only level of government with the authority to deport non-citizens?
Nowhere does the constitution state that only the federal government can deport non-citizens, and I believe that immigration law only states that the federal government has the sole authority to naturalize non-citizens.
Prior to the Naturalization Act of 1906, naturalization was a state responsibility. That act made naturalization a federal responsibility, but I do not believe it revoked the ability of the states to deport non-citizens who had not yet been naturalized.
Since Congress does not have the ability to take authority away from the states without amending the constitution, I do not see any reason why state governments cannot deport (or naturalize) non-citizens.
The problem there is that the federal government can simply allow them right back in, as long as the current president continues to refrain from deporting non-citizens.
As I understand it.
There may have been a Supreme Court decision somewhere along the line of which I am not aware.
The president can pardon anyone for any federal crime. But it strikes me that the pardon cannot be prospective, and can only cover past crimes. Otherwise, the pardon would become a license to commit crimes in perpetuity. For example, if the president could pardon someone for prospective tax cheating, that person would never have to pay taxes again.
Thus, the pardon for illegal immigration would not cover the next day of staying in the country without permission, nor would it cover working in the country without authorization. There is nothing the president can do to protect these illegals from the enforcement of immigration law by a future president.
Everyone supposedly agrees that our current immigration system is broken. But no one ever says how it is broken.
It strikes me that maybe the system of laws isn’t broken, and needs no more than a few tweaks. Rather, it is the lack of will to enforce the laws that is broken.
Yes, the crime must have already been committed, but there is no requirement that there be a charge laid.
There are many cases in history where a president pardoned crimes that had been committed, but where no charges had yet been laid. Examples include those involved with the Whiskey Rebellion and those pardoned after the US Civil War.
As such, there is no reason to think the president cannot pardon people who have already entered the US illegally but who have not yet been charged with entering the US illegally.
On this point, I agree with you. The president can refrain from enforcing laws, but he cannot prevent state and local authorities from enforcing those laws, and he cannot force courts to refrain from ruling on cases brought before them.
Wow, that is 10 shades of awesome, Mr. Eager! Thank you!
Jon, I love ya’ man but you aim too low…
Tiberius ruled way more people than Jesus did.
LOL- “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal…”
Saintly hubris is not his problem and he believes he is much more than simply some worldly ‘head of state’. His favorite phrasing is using first person pronouns, there is no one more important than himself.
That was such a great idea, I just had to try it. You deserve credit for finding that picture in the first place.
Thanks. There is more with music(!) at this wonderful website:
http://academics.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/China/CRSongs/crsongs.htm
I highly recommend, “The People of the World Will Surely Be Victorious!”
It takes too long. The socialists want their new constituency NOW~!
Well, there’s this (click to enlarge):
Hey, superimposing Obama’s face to Octavian (Augustus Ceaser) statue is unfair to Octavian. As ruthless as he was he at least brought the age of Pax Romana, annexed more territory to the empire and has been considered one of Rome’s most competent emperors.
People flash this infographic like it obviously answers the question. What, exactly, is wrong with the system described here? We’re going to give political power to complete strangers, including the ability to commit us to wars, infringe on our liberties, and change our laws. 30 years doesn’t seem an unreasonably long baseline, especially since we cut it down if you have people who can vouch for you here, or if you’re a child who will go through our schools, or are special enough that we are willing to waive the some of the hurdles just to get you here (or are an asylum seeker or various other exceptions).
Now, I can look at this and say that I’d rather restrict the family unification to minor children and spouses, excluding parents, and get the treatment of siblings and adult children to a closer number -probably around 15 years -notably, approximately the same as the length of time for someone who has skills we want -and also notably, the people with skills we want can spend the entire 15 years here.
I could be persuaded to increase the number of hardship visas, I could be persuaded to create some additional categories of visa. I could be convinced to cut some of the hassle for skilled workers. I am not, convinced, that these laws are obviously bad.
This reminds me that the Exalted One prophesized this event when, campaigning(!) in a black church in 2007, he told the congregation:
(And yes, imagining the collective outrage in the media if George W Bush said this has occurred to me)
How about:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18552_so-you-want-to-be-american-5-circles-immigration-hell.html