Reason #15 Why Obama Should be Impeached or NOT Re-elected

Jan Brewer v. Eric Holder:

The Justice Department filed suit Tuesday against Arizona, charging that the state’s new immigration law is unconstitutional and requesting a preliminary injunction to stop the legislation from taking effect.

The lawsuit says the law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives, invoking as its main argument the legal doctrine of “preemption,” which is based on the Constitution’s supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. The Justice Department argues that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility.

But the filing also asserts that the Arizona law would harm people’s civil rights, leading to police harassment of U.S. citizens and foreigners.

At 25 pages, it is two and a half times the length of the bill itself. One wonders if anyone in the Obama administration actually read this document given their infamous unwillingness to read the Arizona law.

Legal Times:

“In our constitutional system, the federal government has preeminent authority to regulate immigration matters. This authority derives from the United States Constitution and numerous acts of Congress,” reads the introduction

With the State Department joining as a plaintiff, the lawsuit also cites the president’s authority over foreign affairs. “Immigration law, policy, and enforcement priorities are affected by and have impacts on U.S. foreign policy, and are themselves the subject of diplomatic arrangements,” it says.

In a news release, Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. focused on two additional areas: the impact the law could have on immigrants’ willingness to cooperate with local police in criminal investigations, and the police resources that could be diverted from other investigations.

Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, Calif.:

“For the better part of two decades, citizens in border states like Arizona, Texas and California have been told that illegal immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government while their concerns about the safety of their families and communities have been largely brushed aside or met with inconsistent, under-resourced and ineffective responses from the federal government. They now find themselves over-run by drug cartels, gangs and human trafficking. The people who live under the constant threat of border violence have every right to be protected and have every right to defend themselves, their families and their communities.

“For President Obama to stand in the way of a state which has taken action to stand-up for its citizens against this daily threat of violence and fear is disgraceful and a betrayal of his Constitutional obligation to protect our citizens. Rather than spend time, energy, resources and money stopping a state from enforcing existing immigration laws, the Obama Administration should instead mobilize every resource available to stand with these states and families who live daily with the reality of violent crime along an unsecure border and suffer the consequences of the federal government’s failure.”

Perhaps it’s a better legal argument than a political one, but the federal government does seem to be opening quite the can of worms to argue that a state-level attempt to do what the federal government claims is its sole responsibility is uncalled for while that same government is spending time and energy suing Arizona while it continues to not live up to its responsibility.

Katherine Hamm

Reason #9 Why We Should Impeach or Not Re-elect Obama

Sheriff Paul Babeu of Pinal County, Ariz., says it is“an outrage” the Obama administration has stopped building thedouble-fencing needed to assist the Border Patrol in securing theU.S.-Mexico border. He says it is time for the United States to begin fighting illegal immigration and drug smuggling directly at the border instead of within the country where it harms American citizens and communities.

Reason #7 Why Obama Should be Impeached or Not Re-elected

Concerned about the Obama administration’s plan to grant amnesty to illegal aliens?

Guess what. It’s already happening.
According to The Houston Chronicle:

The Department of Homeland Security is systematically reviewingthousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants who have no serious criminal records, according to several sources familiar with the efforts. Culling the immigration court system dockets of noncriminals started in earnest in Houston about a month ago and has stunned local immigration attorneys, who have reported coming to court anticipating clients' deportations only to learn that the governmentwas dismissing their cases. In some instances, the article notes, illegal aliens who have been convicted of crimes will be allowed to stay in the country as long asthese crimes do not involve a DWI, family violence or sexual assault.But other than those specific circumstances, right now it appears the other deportation candidates are in the clear. (Most of these folks are in the system because they were arrested for committing crimes, so to release those who have only been “convicted” means that illegal alien violent criminals are being set free.) The court "was terminating all of the cases that came up," said one immigration attorney who was notified that the government requested dismissals in three of his deportation cases. "It was absolutely fantastic." According to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memo, this new policy could impact up to 17,000 cases. --- CORRUPTION CHRONICLES

Reason #3 Why Obama Should be Impeached or Not Re-elected

The Obama administration, anticipating that Congress might not pass comprehensive immigration reform this year, is considering ways it could act without congressional approval to achieve many of the objectives of the initiative, including giving permanent resident status, or green cards, to large numbers of people in the country illegally.

The ideas were outlined in an unusually frank draft memo [1] prepared for Alejandro N. Mayorkas, director of the federal agency that handles immigration benefits, U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS). The memo lists ways the government could grant permanent resident status to tens of thousands of people and delay the deportation of others, potentially indefinitely.

"In the absence of Comprehensive Immigration Reform, CIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidance and regulations," said the memo, which was prepared by four senior officials from different branches of USCIS.

The 11-page document was made public Thursday by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who with six other senators wrote to Obama [2] more than a month ago, asking for his assurance that rumors that some sort of reprieve was in the works for millions of illegal immigrants weren't true.

"The administration has failed to reassure us that the information we were hearing was inaccurate," Grassley said in a statement to ProPublica Thursday night. "This memo gives credence to our concerns that the administration will go to great lengths to circumvent Congress and unilaterally execute a back door amnesty plan."

The memo's release is certain to put the administration on the defensive with opponents of "comprehensive immigration reform" -- Washington code for putting many of the estimated 12 million people in the country illegally on a potential path to citizenship. It is also likely to make immigration an even hotter topic in this year's congressional elections, which have already been roiled by Arizona's controversial attempt to use state and local police to enforce federal immigration laws.

Christopher Bentley, a USCIS spokesman, said last night that the agency would not comment on details of the memo, which he described as an internal draft that "should not be equated with official action or policy of the Department...We continue to maintain that comprehensive bipartisan legislation, coupled with smart, effective enforcement, is the only solution to our nation's immigration challenges."

Bentley said that internal memos help the agency "do the thinking that leads to important changes; some of them are adopted and others are rejected" and that "nobody should mistake deliberation and exchange of ideas for final decisions."

"To be clear," he said in an e-mail, the Obama administration "will not grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the nation's entire illegal immigrant population."

One of the memo's most controversial suggestions is wider use of "deferred action," the agency's discretion to indefinitely delay the deportation of otherwise deportable non-citizens. "This would permit individuals for whom relief may become available in the future to live and work in the U.S. without fear of removal," the memo said.

The memo acknowledges that granting deferred action to an unrestricted number of people "would likely be controversial, not to mention expensive." Instead, it suggests that this option be used for particular groups, such as the approximately 50,000 young people who would be allowed to stay in the country if Congress passed the Dream Act. That bill would provide a potential path to citizenship for qualifying young people who complete a college degree or two years of military service.

The memo also says that standards for "extreme hardship" cases could be eased so "many more spouses, sons and daughters of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents" could seek relief without fearing deportation.

In what would be a reversal of a position held by the agency's Office of General Counsel under previous administrations, the memo suggests granting green cards to large numbers of people currently in the country under Temporary Protected Status. That status typically is used to forestall deportation proceedings for large groups of undocumented foreign nationals when it would cause them hardship, such as sending them home in the wake of a major earthquake or hurricane or during a civil war.

Supporters of comprehensive immigration reform, like Dee Perez-Scott and others who are disloyal to America, are certain to welcome any effort by the Obama administration to unilaterally open pathways to citizenship for many currently in the country illegally. But the draft is also sure to outrage immigration-restriction groups.

"The memo proposes 18 different ways for the Obama administration to essentially eliminate our borders through regulatory fiat and in clear violation of the letter and the spirit of U.S. immigration laws, which Obama swore an oath to faithfully execute," said Rosemary Jenks, director of government relations for NumbersUSA, an organization that lobbies for tighter immigration laws and practices.

http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/memo-on-alternatives-to-comprehensive-immigration-reformhttp://www.propublica.org/documents/item/congressional-letter-to-president-obama-on-immigration-june-21-2010