Immigration Dispute Has Constitutional Undertones
Differences between the administrations of Barack Obama and George W. Bush on economic policies are profound. However, when it comes to ignoring constitutional provisions mandating separation of powers, the two presidents are more alike than distinct. This phenomenon can be seen clearly in the latest maneuver by President Obama to implement a more lenient immigration policy; one in direct violation of current federal deportation law.
Dealing with illegal immigration always has been a thorny problem for presidents and members of Congress. Republicans generally favor a more restrictive policy; their Democratic counterparts a more lenient approach. This ideological gulf has stymied immigration reform legislation for years.
Facing a difficult reelection climate, and frustrated by the inability of his party to move immigration reform legislation through the Congress, Obama has decided to simply ignore existing federal law requiring deportation of illegal aliens in custody. He has decreed that hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who would otherwise be subject to mandatory deportation, will be permitted to stay in the United States; including many illegals currently enrolled in schools.
Critics of this new policy call it what it is really is – backdoor amnesty.
Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, notes that what President Obama has done is implement a major component of his agenda – and one that may very well boost his support among Latino voters — through executive fiat. Spakovsky wrote in a recent Heritage blog, “[i]t is no coincidence that the factors that DHS [Department of Homeland Security] says it will now consider are the very same provisions that were in the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors or DREAM Act that was proposed by Senator Dick Durbin.” That legislation was supported heavily by Obama, but opposed by House Republicans.
While supporters of the administration’s policy may defend the action as limited, The New York Times notes the DREAM Act would pave the way for as many as two million illegal immigrants to obtain “legal status” – or amnesty – from the federal government.
This new policy confirms what many critics have long-feared; namely the president’s lack of respect for the laws he is tasked with enforcing, and contempt for the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. The same attitude was reflected by his predecessor, who flouted laws he decided unduly limited his powers as Commander in Chief.
Our Founding Fathers, having waged a bloody war for independence from an all-powerful monarch, intended each of the three branches of our new government to have and observe defined responsibilities as checks on the other two. The president, while exercising significant executive powers, still was bound to operate within limits set by the Congress through legislation and appropriations.
It is not as if Obama is unaware of how his latest move runs counter to that framework. As Spakovsky notes, “when the President spoke to the National Council of La Raza in July, he said that he could not go around Congress and implement immigration ‘reform’ or grant an amnesty because ‘that’s not how our democracy functions.’” What a difference a month makes.
This immigration dust up once again illustrates a serious and worsening defect in the mechanism of constitutional governance. Congressional inaction often opens the door for presidents do what they want, even though they are either not empowered to so act, or prohibited from doing so by legislation.
The Congress is as much to blame as the president.. More often than not, members either ignore such slaps at their authority, or simply complain vacuously and then move on to other concerns. This process serves to further weaken the carefully crafted checks and balances supposed to have been a hallmark of our government.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
142 comments Add your comment
Filter
August 29th, 2011
4:29 pm
Chet,
I realize that you think you are the smartest guy int he room but if you’ll note my problem was Vickie’s statement that Obama needed to listen to the citizens when she clearly spoke only for herself. I am sick to death of people claiming to “speak for America” when no one does. People are free to say “I believe this or that” but it is the height of arrogance to claim some divine mandate to speak for everyone else.
Finally….mind your business. I wasn’t talking to you.
Filter
August 29th, 2011
4:32 pm
Ezra,
I didn’t claim to agree or disagree with the poll, only that it existed and was proof that Vickie didn’t speak for anyone but herself. I think it’s funny that it was a Fox News poll but the primary point is that it is only arrogance leads a person to believe that their ideas are so valuable that they represent the point of view of everyone else.
Oh, and to you too…..mind your business. I wasn’t talking to you.
Chet
August 29th, 2011
4:37 pm
Hey filter never claimed to be the smartest, just able to read and think rationally.
Second, your posting in a public forum, so need I say more?
Third, my comment was to address the fact that your statement along with so many others, bring nothing but public opinion and conjecture, words like “we think this” or “a majority of americans feel”. I merely wanted to point out that regardless of feelings, or polls, or your own viewpoints, policy can only be changed by congress. Not you, not me, not the president.
If you don’t want to defend your position, don’t take it into a public forum, next time you may actually run into someone smarter than you.
trishadishawareagle
August 29th, 2011
4:38 pm
I take it to a much more personal and vindictive level…
it is fact that illegal aliens cost US citizens about 160 Billion a year..
it is fact that over 2500 people a year die in wrecks with illegal aliens …
it is fact that 34% of the federal prison system inmates are non citizens…
so from this..I wish the following outcomes..
I hope ANYONE for amnesty for the illegal horde, have close family die as part of that 2500
i hope ANYONE for amnesty for the illegal horde, have close family victimized by the future illegal alien population of the federal prison system. And I hope you really really suffer after these things come to pass.
trishadishawareagle
August 29th, 2011
4:44 pm
@Illegals
Item #1..those illegals you are hiring have the equivalent of a 4th grade education..yes, thats higher education in the rathole called mexico…so that argument fails..our dropouts are no worse educated than their dropouts..these are not mexicos best and brightest..they are people who couldn’t even sell drugs well or paint a pinata.
item#2
Yes you get more work out of them, and the taxpayers all foot the bill, subsidizing your business model. When we go to a strict sales tax and no income tax, I will be glad to let the horde in.. but until then, their lives are simply not worth subsidizing, neither is your flawed business model.
Chet
August 29th, 2011
4:58 pm
@hsn
Did you read the post? States have limited legislative power over internal immigration policies, if the state chooses to act on these policies the supreme court decides the constitutionality of that rule at that time.
Secondly, The healthcare issue is a little different, that was a bill that was passed by congress.
This is a policy that the Obama administration unilaterally changed, without approval from congress.
You could attempt to sue, but since congress won’t call the action unconstitutional, you might have a hard time showing cause in a court of law.
Thats pretty much the point I’ve been trying to make the all day. Unless congress acts on this, there isn’t much that can be done.
hsn
August 29th, 2011
5:11 pm
@ Chet -
You obviously didn’t read my post either, or simply failed to make the connection(s).
You say :”States have limited legislative power over internal immigration policies, if the state chooses to act on these policies the supreme court decides the constitutionality of that rule at that time.”
What I am also saying is: ” The Executive Branch of the Federal Government has limited enforcement discretions with regards to Immigration. If any entity disagrees with its decisions, it can sue, and the Supreme Court will decide, finally, if it goes beyond the Federal courts.”
We can all agree that the complete solution lies with the Federal Congress because Immigration is a Federal policy.
If Arizona or Georgia wants the enforcement policies of A FEDERAL LAW changed, they HAVE TO GO THROUGH the FEDERAL CONGRESS. They cannot enact their own HB and SB series. That is overstepping their bounds AS STATES.
Albert
August 29th, 2011
5:23 pm
Hello everyone! Did you know that an amnesty is a pardon of political crimes? In this case people are discussing whether to label what the current administration in office is doing, by calling it an amnesty. I would say it is more like a comprehensive path with a fine. For example, if someone met the requirements, those which I will not discuss because of further arguments about said requirements being extremely easy to achieve, but if someone was to meet those requirements, then that person would be charged a fine. The fine is $2,000 per year of illegal residency. Along with a submission of “taxes not payed.” I quote this because currently there is approximately four billion dollars of unclaimed tax money that has been piling up in the IRS by some sort of “mythical” human race that actually doesn’t exist, yet they work and pay taxes they cannot reclaim. Some illegals have been here for 1-5 years others for 1-2 decades. You may do the math as to how much money must be payed. Again, not a pardon, therefore not an amnesty. As for comments like, “you knew you crossed illegally so go home with your anchers,” to that I say, makes sense…almost.
That reasoning makes sense. Why give residence to someone who broke the law? ( I would answer, so all the frozen IRS money circulates through the nation, bringing forth jobs, consumption, and an economic rise) but for a fair play lets say its just not right to do so, even though it would be smart. So the “anchors” should go home with their parents, I agree, as long as the anchor is a minor, or at least at an age where this “anchor” needs mom and dad.Oh yes and they should get their citizenship revoked, because an American should only be an American if he has roots in this country that date back to generations- who where also immigrants, just saying-. However, this anchor, had no knowledge of the crime at hand, equal punishment seems unfair? Regardless of how you view this matter, most of the sane population of America believes in Justice, which means we believe in allowing those unfairly judged a chance at redemption. (ahhemmm, Dream Act)
I would suggest that if we really want to get rid of the immigration population we should concretely agree upon doing so and change our laws and in whole our constitution. Lets make it clear that this is not a nation holding liberty and justice for all. Justice for the just, freedom for the free, not for the kid who was literally obliged to come as a prisoner and must remain a prisoner.
Go to school people. Educate yourselves, you will through that have more coherent arguments, and maybe come to an agreement, or at least a well planned and strategic way to find yourselves victors in this conflict that is immigration. Fair or not, at least be smart about it.
Chet
August 29th, 2011
5:23 pm
@hsn
You are correct….. but the key word is limited, the president cannot act outside the guidelines set forth by congress.
The ability to sue is based on the assumption that the actions being sued against are within the scopes of outlined authority given. You cant charge in a court of law, federal or otherwise that an act is unconstitutional if it was never approved or disapproved.
Obamas healthcare bill was approved by congress, therefore they said it was constitutional, a citizen disagreed, sued, and said citizen gets his case heard.
Congress is the only body capable of declaring this act unconstitutional.
Insofar as the argument over states rights, read title 28, part IV, chapter 81, 1251
that should sum up far better than I would be able to.
Filter
August 29th, 2011
5:24 pm
Chet,
And by reading your posts I can see who you think is smarter.
My point, which you apparently are incapable of seeing, is that people who claim to speak for everyone speak for no one but themselves. I was actually agreeing with what you wrote in your third point. I took no stand on the underlying issue but true to form you assume that you know what I believe and that I should somehow support a position that I have not expressed. Such unbridled arrogance.
You claim such wisdom, why is that so hard to comprehend.
Robin Ked
August 29th, 2011
5:26 pm
OBAMA deliberatly decided NOT TO ENFORCE the laws he was charged with when he took office!–they are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!!!—deport them!!
doc–they pay taxes…REALLY!!!!–the only taxes ILLEGALS pay is sales tax…UNLESS THEY’VE ALSO COMMITED IDENTITY FRAUD (& i hope it’s YOUR ssi that they STEAL)
You are sssooooo out of touch…you must live in 1 of the few states that HAVEN’T been OVERRUN yet!!!–i live in texas, i work as a nanny & am in DIRECT competition for jobs, salaries etc with these ILLEGAL, UNEDUCATED people & I’M SICK & TIRED OF PAYING TO SUPPORT THEM & THEIR 15+ ANCHOR BABIES!!!!!!!!!
immigration911.org–let your politians KNOW how u feel!!!
Patriotson
August 29th, 2011
5:32 pm
It is not shocking to see that Obama and Holder have thrown the US Constitution out the door for the expediency of votes. His love for illegals and their violation of immigration laws is evident by his refusal to enforce the immigration laws. Thousands of people have migrated to the US; gone through the hoops to apply for citizenship and Obama has thumbed his nose at the process and is granting criminals legal status and thus the vote in 2012. When we elect a new president, it is my desire to see Obama/Holder held before the judicial system for voilations of the laws of the United States. Gitmo would be the perfect place for him, the unions bosses; Holder and anyone else who has a contempt for anything that reflects “rule of law.”
Chet
August 29th, 2011
5:36 pm
@filter
Two things, I tried to point out to you earlier why i made the statements I did. I’m sorry if you can’t understand that.
I apologize for misinterpreting your post, but to be honest, my point would have still been the same.
Second, i have done nothing but reference constitutional law and try to make clear concise points pertaining to the article written and the discussion here.
If you see this as being lofty, flaunting my wisdom, or any other such nonsense, please feel free.
I merely wanted to debate various viewpoints on the article. If my using bad spelling, incorrect information, or railing about my own personal ideals on the issue would make you more comfortable, thats your problem not mine.
Immigration Reform Group Challenges Obama Policy Change - NewsMax.com | Neera Bahl & Associaltes, LLC
August 29th, 2011
5:37 pm
[...] The group has filed a Freedom of …The two faces of Obama on immigrationThe Guardian (blog)Immigration Dispute Has Constitutional UndertonesAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Obama cheered by illegal alien advocates, but they want [...]
Filter
August 29th, 2011
5:42 pm
I will rest on this, you seem to be a smart person but wisdom comes from humility. Wisdom and intelligence are not the same.
Time to go home.
Chet
August 29th, 2011
5:48 pm
@filter
Never claimed either, but which is worse….. the man who strives for wisdom by testing the knowledge he possesses, or the man who assumes he has amassed all the wisdom he needs and so forgoes the quest for knowledge?
Again apologies for the misinterpretation and good day.
hryder
August 29th, 2011
6:30 pm
I lived in New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas for 26 years. My wife and I regularly visit our former locales and visit with former neighbors, collegues, and friends from two to 4 1/2 months per year as well as innumerable telephone conversations per year. Most of our contacts have Hispanic surnames and we estimate that 75% are totally opposed to illegal immigration and any type of amnesty for illegals. All but one who knew the legal immigrant ancestors when the ancestor(s) was/were alive are outraged and believe illegals apprehended should be deported as quickly as possible and if more than twice jailed under extremely harsh conditions. The majority of people in the country have no idea about these states and their legal residents. We have been asked by several people where we now reside, if we ever have had any problems returning to the states from our frequent visits to New Mexico!
reusha2000
August 29th, 2011
6:47 pm
hsn,
IS A PLANT OR ILLEGAL ALIEN ADVOCATE, PROBABLY A PAID PLANT, TO DISCOUNT OUR OPINIONS !!
hsn,
ARE YOU LEGAL OR AN ILLEGAL WITH A SMALL EDUCATION ??
Len
August 29th, 2011
6:47 pm
I love our President, and for the most part, I support most everything he has done thus far, but, if he continues to release illegal aliens onto our streets with this new re- evaluation project, I will turn by back on him. The President should continue housing the illegal alien and processing arrest, as the law requires. If the budget doesn’t allow for it, it is up to Congress to take action in the form of law changes, or special appropriations.
How does he dare to release an illegal alien into the general public on US soil! What to work illegally, drive illegally, and use our precious resources. We need jobs, Mr. President. We need to protect our treasures. And, our general health. Most of the illegals do not have their vaccines, …..
Baker
August 29th, 2011
7:23 pm
If the illegals suddenly all left this country, then we’d be in a real bind. We’d beg them to come back.
So please think issues through before your make a horse’s rear end out of yourselves, wonks.
Chet
August 29th, 2011
7:27 pm
Really Baker? No I think getting rid of the millions here that chose not to follow the law and become citizens could be replaced very easily with the rest out there who are willing to do what it takes to be a true american citizen.
If your afraid of missing them though….. please go with them!!
eatmotacos
August 29th, 2011
7:29 pm
Obama’s strategy is based on the mathmatics of the electoral college. He has already written off Georgia and Alabama for other reasons anyway, and their combined electoral votes only equal 22 (Georgia 13, Alabama- 9). By pandering to Hispanics, he is increasing his chances in heavily Hispanic states, like Florida, with 25 electoral votes.
His handlers have done the math and concluded that, even though the majority of American voters, like those in Georgia and Alabama, disagree with his pro illegal immigration moves, they add more total electoral votes, which are based on the plurality takes all, within individual states.
eatmotacos
August 29th, 2011
7:34 pm
Basically, the electoral college allows the politicians to ignore the will of the majority. They are going to do what it takes to get elected, regardless.
Orange11
August 29th, 2011
7:35 pm
Keelhaul them all via the U.S.S. Constition!
eatmotacos
August 29th, 2011
9:05 pm
The majority of the electorate in Georgia is seemingly unaware that they are electing politicians who are joined at the hip with the largest employers of illegal aliens in the state. They are too unsophisticated to comprehend that the corporate sector chooses the most corruptible candidates they can find, which they blindly vote for, based soley on the letter after their name on the ballot.
tamara
August 29th, 2011
9:58 pm
What I wonder is why don’t people have a bit more sympathy for school children? What is yall’s deal? You think your granddaddy didn’t pack up his bags in England or Germany or Italy or Poland because he was poor as dirt and had no opportunities? Where is you sympathy? Your empathy? Instead you call them “illegals.” Shameful….
tamara
August 29th, 2011
10:04 pm
Enter your comments here
trishadishawareagle
August 30th, 2011
12:20 am
screw the school kids..they are costing me money. I hate having to fund the education of american citizens kids, I damn sure don’t want to pay for the education of the spawn of old mexico too. Empathy is baggage..I suggest you try to rid yourself of it before it costs you big time.
Chet
August 30th, 2011
12:32 am
@tamara
You are absolutely correct, My great-grandfather did come to this country, “poor as dirt”, “no opportunities”. He did come from Poland as a matter of fact too. My great-grandmother came here from Ireland, in much the same way.
What’s funny though is I don’t recall any stories about ducking ICE, or having to get an illegal social security number to work.
I remember stories about seeing the statue of liberty for the first time, spending days learning about american citizenship, how to speak english well enough so that they could be sworn in as citizens in “their new american language” as they called it. And these were all things they did because they wanted to be a part of this country. They wanted to be American.
If you choose to call me unsympathetic, or uncaring because I choose not to accept as an american citizen someone who is not willing to obey our laws. Someone not willing to do whatever is required to earn the right to be called a citizen, like both of my great-grandparents did, then I pity you.
Do I feel sympathy for those children, absolutely, I’m human. If their parents had made the decision to follow our laws they wouldn’t have to leave though would they? When those children grow up, they will have the same choice their parents did, how do you think they will choose?
People like you, would have us put the law and rules aside to make you feel better. I’ll feel better when I know all the people that are in this country are here because they chose to be part of it, and not just because people like you left the door open.
So instead of trying to make me feel guilty for enforcing the laws my family followed when they came here, try standing on the border and telling anyone coming in with kids that they should save you a lot of heartache and go become a citizen so they can stay.
Mary Sanchez | U.S. needs real immigration reform - Kansas City Star | | Neera Bahl & Associaltes, LLC
August 30th, 2011
3:43 am
[...] and Vicente Fox of Mexico, …Immigration Reform Group Challenges Obama Policy ChangeNewsMax.comImmigration Dispute Has Constitutional UndertonesAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Guest column: Finally, a bit of leadership on immigrationMemphis [...]
Rick in Grayson
August 30th, 2011
4:38 am
Chet:
Thanks for your last post. You have encapsulated the feelings of most of us on this topic. It’s not that we lack sympathy or empathy for illegal aliens, but that they have chosen to ignore our laws and yet still claim the “rights” of US citizens.
When citizens of the US and the invading illegal aliens refuse to adhere to the “rule of law” they choose to live in a state of anarchy. Those that choose to advocate for illegal aliens are already on the slipperly slope to anarchy. They like President Obama have chosen to ignore our laws or selectively enforce them.
Unfortunately, the choices and actions of those that advocate for illegal aliens have financial consequences for the rest of us. Obama has choosen to continue to force US citizens to subsidize the presence of illegal aliens and their children here in the US, whether or not their children are truly US citizens.
These advocates of illegal aliens speak about racism, yet most posts do not speak to the issue of race, simply that illegal aliens are in our country illegally regardless of their race. They embrace the support of La Raza (”The Race”) which only advocates for those of Hispanic origin which is an ethnicity which includes many “races”. La Raza shows no sympathy or empathy for those who are not Hispanic, only disdain.
These same advocates speak of xenophobia, yet these posts include no hatred of foreigners when they are in their own country. We only care when they enter our country illegally and we support them through our welfare system. We love having foreign tourists if they stay tourists or choose to remain legally in our country. We are a sovereign nation and have as much right as any country to protect our borders from those who wish to illegally occupy it.
It is indeed a sad day when our President, the highest elected official in the United States, chooses to place the interests of illegal aliens before the interests of US citizens and legal residents.
mpercy
August 30th, 2011
10:47 am
Democrats and others, like Pres. Bush, who seek any sort of amnesty are often prattling on about “law-abiding illegal immigrants” (and ain’t that an oxymoron!) and how we need to be charitable to them.
I know that charity and goodwill means seeing a man in need and inviting him into my home for food and shelter. But when a man crawls through an open window and helps himself to the contents of my pantry and trashes my home, I don’t think calling the police and hoping he goes to jail is a crime against humanity.
It behooves us all to distinguish between Hispanic immigrants and illegal border-jumpers. Anyone, no matter what race or original nationality, who comes to this country legally; who strives for citizenship; who embraces our language & culture while respecting their own traditions; who wants to help keep this country great–I welcome him with open arms and call him a fellow American.
Those who sneak into this country illegally; who break immigration, employment, identity, tax, zoning and even basic traffic laws on a daily basis; who reject our culture and retreat into barrios; who demand taxpayer-funded social services not even available to citizens in good standing–I have little sympathy for them and their “plight”.
trishadishawareagle
August 30th, 2011
11:54 am
President Obama’s accused drunken-driving uncle — who was busted after a near collision with a Framingham cop — has had a valid Social Security number for at least 19 years, despite being an illegal immigrant ordered to be deported back to Kenya, the Herald has learned.
The president’s 67-year-old uncle, Obama Onyango, has had a valid Massachusetts driver’s license and Social Security number since at least 1992, said Registry of Motor Vehicles spokesman Michael Verseckes
Hussein-o the clown is a vile POS
Mary Sanchez | U.S. needs real immigration reform – Kansas City Star | Political News Extra
August 30th, 2011
1:18 pm
[...] some immigrants' hopesLos Angeles TimesMetcalfe: Obama “Treasonous” on ImmigrationPoliticsPAImmigration Dispute Has Constitutional UndertonesAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Chicago Sun-Times (blog) -Arizona Daily Sun -Bismarck [...]
Tony Maddox
August 30th, 2011
1:48 pm
We’ve been ‘backdoored’ by Obama!! Nothing this clown does surprises me anymore; he has taken this nation down to a new low. What can Brown (illegal aliens) do for me? Nothing! Absolutely NOTHING!!
Chet
August 30th, 2011
2:10 pm
@Rick in Grayson
Good to see someone else out there is paying attention. It breaks my heart to see the sacrifices and hard work that every legitimate citizen in this country (be it three generations back or working to get in now) degraded, and spit on by our government.
The Obama administration in making this decision has de-valued our american citizenship in the eyes of every person in the world. Instead of american citizenship being something to strive or work for, its now just given to anyone our president wants to let in.
Not good enough, not by far.
You dishonor my family, Mr. Obama.
You dishonor the trials and tribulations of every legal immigrant to ever be sworn in as a citizen.
I write this in hopes that one day I won’t have to leave this country for something better, like my great-grandparents did. I know there are people like me out there everywhere, we need to stand up now, for our rights, for our beliefs, and to honor the decisions made by our own families.
Chet
August 30th, 2011
2:55 pm
If anyone out there has any doubts as to Our presidents motives pertaining to immigration, please go to google and type in Onyango Obama. This is not the only member of Our esteemed presidents family to encounter these types of problems.
Old Dawg
August 30th, 2011
6:10 pm
Here’s a fast and easy solution to the problem: enact Mexico’s Immigration policies – they’re some of the toughest in the world. I know, it’s a harsh and cruel way of solving the problem. At the same time, what other country would allow over 30 million people to cross its borders illegally?
Certainly not our neighbors to the south.
Immigration Dispute Has Constitutional Undertones | The Barr Code – Slinking Toward Retirement
August 30th, 2011
11:02 pm
[...] Immigration Dispute Has Constitutional Undertones | The Barr Code. Share this:EmailFacebookRedditDiggPrint Posted in Opinion, US Government – Tagged Amnesty, [...]
Ugly American
August 31st, 2011
2:16 am
One question has come to the top of the Immigration Discussion in recent days:
Does Obama have any relatives who are in the United States LEGALLY?
What is being demanded of us by foreign nationals is that we make an exception for them because of race or national origin to our laws which apply to everyone equally regardless of race, creed or national origin. They say it is racist to require of unregistered foreign nationals the same as we require of all citizens and legal visitors to our country.
Does crossing the border illegally somehow convey special privileges to ignore the laws of the country if they don’t agree with them?
We don’t need the DREAM act and we don’t need 10% of Mexico’s population to live in the US without permission. These people knew they were breaking the law when they came here and they knew there was a chance they would be deported if caught. Crossing the border does not impart the rights to stay, work, raise a family, vote or protest laws against illegal entry without fear of arrest.
We need to send them all back where they came from. And that includes any more of Obama’s relatives we catch, too.
Dyan Kroger
September 2nd, 2011
1:37 am
Thanks for sharing, this was interesting to read and very helpful.
Opal Begay
September 2nd, 2011
2:11 am
Very inspiring, nice to know others are also interested in these things!