Mollie Tibbets. Kate Steinle. Sarah Root.
Three young American women, dead at the hands of illegal aliens. I am freaking sick of it.
By Michael Bargo, Jr.
The DACA program being terminated by AG Sessions was a Federal program started by President Obama. The program was promoted as an administrative strategy to provide eligible youth relief from deportation. Since the entire issue has been clouded with political rhetoric it’s important to look at its legal and constitutional status.
The DACA program was started when on November 20, 2014 President Obama issued an Executive Order. It’s important to note that the US Constitution does not allow any president to set immigration policy. Since the DACA EO was directed to delay deportation of illegal immigrants it clearly falls under the authority of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and those Federal rules can only be passed by Congress. The Constitution clearly states in Article I Section 8 clause 3 that only the Congress shall have power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” It further states that all legislative powers shall reside in Congress, which shall be composed of a House of Representatives and a Senate.
The power to establish any rules regarding immigration do not reside in the office of President and never have. So, at this point the question is moot: President Obama did not have any authority to issue a DACA order through any “executive action.”
President Obama himself stated twenty-two times that he has no authority over issues of immigration. This then means he can’t unilaterally change any immigration laws. But President Obama’s entire presidency was an exercise in executive overreach, and several of the changes he made to immigration law were overturned by the Supreme Court.
It’s important to understand that whether or not one agrees with what President Obama does about immigration is irrelevant: he has no authority under the Constitution to write or rewrite, or amend, the rules of immigration passed by Congress such as the 1996 Illegal Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act. What President Obama frequently did during his presidency was go around Congress and write his own laws by changing the application of existing law through new regulations and rules. He has no more authority to change laws through bureaucratic rule changes than he does to pass a law.
Image via dailystar.com.lb
Family Security Matters
by MICHAEL CUTLER
Immigration (naturalization) was the key to their terrorist activities.
On June 8, 2017 the Department of Justice issued a press release, Two Men Arrested for Terrorist Activities on Behalf of Hizballah’s Islamic Jihad Organization.
As you will see, terrorists understand that naturalization enables them to act as “Sleepers” and hide in plain sight in the United States and facilitate their movement around the world where they threaten our allies and other countries.
While it is reassuring that these two terror suspects have been taken into custody, charged with an extensive list of terror-related crimes, the criminal complaints, filed in conjunction with this case note the extremely disturbing fact that these defendants as well as others, both known and unknown, committed overt acts in support of Hezbollah that are enumerated in the complaints concerning Samer el Debek, a/k/a Samer Eldebek and Ali Mohamad Kourani, a/k/a Jacob Lewis, a/k/a Daniel
In other words, while these two are out of action, others are still “out there” and may not all be known to law enforcement. That chilling prospect is certainly not conducive to getting a good night’s sleep.
Photo via US Daily Review
Family Security Matters
by RONALD R. CHERRY, MD
Who’s in charge of immigration in the United States of America? The question really boils down to who’s in charge of law in the United States of America. Our highest secular law is the US Constitution, so that is where we will start. What does the US Constitution say about immigration? It says nothing about immigration specifically, but our Constitution grants Congress the power to “provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States” and to “repel invasions” and to “establish a uniform rule of naturalization” through the power of Federal Law. This is what Congress did in 1952 with the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), later amended in 1965. The Constitution grants the President powers related to foreign relations, such as the making of treaties with consent of the Senate, and for our common defense as Commander in Chief of the American armed forces during war and other foreign dangers to our general welfare. The Constitution gives the Supreme Court power to resolve disputes arising under the Constitution and Federal Law, but it does not give the Supreme Court, or the lesser Federal Courts, power thereby to override or veto Federal Law which is in pursuance of the Constitution, or power to override or veto Presidential execution thereof.
Here is the law:
“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.” Immigration and Nationality Act, 1952.
Dear Presiden Trump,
We just found out that Judge Douchebag in Hawaii is issuing a Nationwide Restraining Order against your Lawful Order on the grounds of Discrimination.
STOP Pussy Footing Around and CALL THEIR BLUFF!!
Immediately, TONIGHT!, Issue an Executive Order HALTING ALL IMMIGRATION. PERIOD!!
Let them CHOKE ON THAT FOR A WHILE.
Family Security Matters
by MICHAEL CUTLER
Irresponsible incendiary rhetoric spewed by politicians and members of the media, in reaction to the executive order signed by President Trump to temporarily suspend the entry into the U.S. of aliens from a limited number of countries that are associated with terrorism, whether they had been issued visas, has fired up throngs of demonstrators in New York City and elsewhere.
President Trump began his executive order by noting how failures of the immigration system enabled terrorists to carry out the murder of 3,000 innocent people in the United States on 9/11.
The 9/11 Commission was crystal clear about the ways that failures of the immigration system enabled not only the 9/11 terrorists, but others, to enter the United States and embed themselves as they went about their deadly preparation. We have seen similar attacks in the years since as I noted in my article, “Reflections On 9/11’S Vulernabilities.”
The report, “9/11 and Terrorist Travel – Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.” began with this first paragraph:
SECURE FREEDOM MINUTE
Donald Trump reportedly will announce today further executive actions on immigration, including at least temporary restrictions on accepting refugees from nations with ties to “radical Islamic terrorism.” Critics claim these new restrictions violate constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion.
In fact, no alien has a right to come to this country, let alone an entitlement to the liberties assured by our Constitution. The President has complete latitude in determining who is admitted into the United States. His bipartisan predecessors exercised this power in recent decades to block immigration by adherents to hostile ideologies like Naziism or communism that require their adherents to seek the destruction of our form of government.
Mr. Trump recognizes that we must not import in our time more immigrants committed to a similar outcome in the name of imposing here another supremacist totalitarian ideology, Islam’s Sharia.
He’s absolutely right.
The Obama administration’s strategy is to count on the fact that the public and the media will not take notice of each individual and incremental step they are taking to undermine immigration enforcement and grant de facto amnesty to as many illegal aliens as possible. This report exposes the strategy and the policy objectives behind it