Washington Post: Obama’s Unilateral Immigration Action Is “Unprecedented”

220px-Washington_Post_buildingPresident_Barack_ObamaThe Washington Post has published a hard-hitting editorial that not only accuses the Obama Administration of fudging the figures on its unilateral immigration changes but calls the action “unprecedented” and “indefensible.” The stinging editorial from a generally favorable newspaper amplifies the criticism of others, including myself, that President Obama is doing considerable damage to the separation of powers and, more generally, our constitutional system in these actions.

The Post details what it views as highly suspicious figures coming out of the Administration — a continuing problem raised by critics in various controversies that has reduced the credibility of the Administration as a whole. The Administration is using a figure of affected persons that it says puts the scope of its action in line with changes made by President George Bush — a claim repeated on various commentators and bloggers. However, the Post says “there is every reason to believe that the estimate is wildly exaggerated and based mainly on what appears to have been a misunderstanding at the time.”

While the Post supports changes in immigration and criticizes the Republicans in the House of Representatives, it insists that that does not alter the fact that President Obama is taking “unprecedented” action:

Republicans’ failure to address immigration also does not justify Mr. Obama’s massive unilateral act. Unlike Mr. Bush in 1990, whose much more modest order was in step with legislation recently and subsequently enacted by Congress, Mr. Obama’s move flies in the face of congressional intent — no matter how indefensible that intent looks.

76 thoughts on “Washington Post: Obama’s Unilateral Immigration Action Is “Unprecedented””

  1. I love Ronald Reagan. But he proved you can’t just declare amnesty. There has to be law. Or multiple laws. There’s no reason every single thing needs to be in one bill.

    I think doable would be for those already here, raising children, with jobs (which would require some exception to employer fees). Nothing more. Just start the process for those people. They may have been paying Social Security and would need to be credited with what they paid. Income Tax would be effective the day you enroll. Are fees necessary? Would that discourage enrollment, leaving still how many unregistered.

    But no other change until this is being done. It should be processed at the State level. Closer to applicants for physical verification.

    See how much is required for one law? That’s why ACA is such a burden on the taxpayer. So, just one bill. If Obama vetoes, I think an override is doable.

    And before everybody screams about the others, it can’t be done all at once!

  2. happypappies … maybe I should change my “nick” to “Ornerydog” …and use an old photo of one of my old dogs named “Ike”…who defined ornery around anyone but little children. 😉

    1. Ornerydog I like it – Just don’t make it a wienie dog lol. Is your birthday in the summer?

Comments are closed.