Skip to comments.Law Profs: Obama's Deferred Action Not Supported By Constitution [DREAM Act]
Posted on 10/09/2012 10:12:40 PM PDT by zeestephen
If the president may constitutionally permit 15 percent of the nation's illegal immigrant population to remain in the United States without fear of removal, why may he not do the same for 50 percent of that population, or for all of it?
(Excerpt) Read more at cis.org ...
It used to be called malfeasance, and it was prosecutable. Cops used to get fired for it routinely.
The President is not a King. And even the English Kings were subject to the laws.
Somewhere in this spectrum we find our President of the United States. Only occasionally does he reveal his disdain for the system when, for example, he advocates a revolutionary interpretation of the Bill of Rights as being proactive requiring the government to redistribute property. But his biography, his associations, his words, and his actions in government all lead to an obvious conclusion, Barack Obama is dissatisfied with our constitutional system of laws and our market system of economics and wants to junk them both.
For Obama who is a committed leftist and for those less committed and perhaps less perceptive in the media, there is no moral dilemma presented by violating the Constitution in the manner described in this article. The document carries no inherent legitimacy to these people. To the contrary, the Constitution is an obstacle to committed leftists like Barack Obama. It is owed no respect.
Nor do our legal system or our free-market system deserve any deference. They are inherently unfair and hence illegitimate. So the means used to ameliorate the wrongs of the system are not to be eschewed merely because they involve lies, hypocrisy, fraud, or the most egregious kind of demagoguery. All of these vices are to be tolerated in the advancement of the new model. Human nature has infinite capacity to rationalize what it wants and Marxism provides an entire worldview full of excuses.
One can choose virtually any issue to illustrate the point. To preserve Bill Clinton in office, decency was thrown aside and hypocrisy was embraced by feminists. If one needs to win an election to advance the cause by creative counting of votes in the nation's ghettos, that is merely an expression of purer democracy, that is, democracy as it should be practiced. If the system is inherently racist, we have no moral grounds upon which to deny Brown people the advantages of living in this imperialistic land and so it is quite moral to fail to enforce immigration laws. The imperatives of the Constitution are but theoretical constructs to justify racism.
How much of this hypocrisy one is willing to swallow depends on how far along the continuum one is toward Bolshevism or toward the mass murders of Chairman Mao. Is one merely a lunchpail Democrat voting that way because his parents did or is one found at another stop along the spectrum, perhaps a civil rights worker of the 50s and 60s, or, is one a community organizer? There are many stops for this trolley.
It is hardly surprising that Obama has no moral compunction against what he does or what he says. That would be true to some degree even if he were not a narcissist. It is hardly surprising that a leftist media fail to even report his lies and misfeasance.
Bill Bennett says, quoting others, that culture trumps politics. Mark Levin says that you must restore a constitutional system. I say they are both right but that one must understand the psychology of the process of rationalization which distorts both our culture and our Constitution. That process is far more complicated than suggested here but we must do more than merely rail against the culture or deplore the rupture of the Constitution.
Thanks for your little essay, Nathan.
You make some excellent points.
Look out, America!
I've been beating the drum on this issue for several months.
I think Obama’s approach will be more measured and more subtle.
If he is reelected, he can simply proclaim two years of “deferred action” for ALL illegal immigrants.
That means an 11 million man rush for Green Cards and authentic Social Security numbers.
Once this crew is “Temporarily” legal, we will never be able to revoke it - legally or politically.
“Temporarily” legal will become “Permanently” legal which will be become “Citizenship.”
When these guys get the vote, they will vote Democrat, and Conservatism will die an instantaneous political death.
Meanwhile, another 11 million illegals will swarm into the USA, waiting for their chance to elect more Democrats.
Meanwhile, Republicans and Conservatives will passively watch, and take no serious action to prevent our political destruction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.