An Ultimatum issued by 10
state attorney generals, led by Texas. Threated the Trump administration to
rescind DACA (Deferred Action Of Arrivals
(DACA) is an American immigration policy founded by the Obama Administration.
DACA allows certain undocumented immigrants who entered the Country as minors
(often referred to as dreamers) receive a renewable two-year period of deferred
action from deportation and eligibility for a work permit.) by September 5th
or the states will attempt to abort DACA in court. House speaker Paul Ryan
encouraged legislative efforts to maintain protection for DACA recipients and
advises President Trump to not terminate DACA. Paul Ryan believes that Trump should preserve
the DACA policy and not discard the program as a temporary solution, so
congress can later come in and determine the final decision whether to keep
DACA, or terminate it.
The controversy
of whether to keep or rescind DACA goes deeper than the Trump administration’s
immigration stance; it reveals a congressional issue with the overreach of
executive power. Many republicans believe President Obama had no authority to
enact DACA, due to it being implemented unilaterally instead of working through
congress. Although it is a congressional issue, Paul Ryan said, “there are people who are in limbo. These
are kids who know no other country, who were brought here by their parents and
don't know another home.” Paul Ryan continues to urge the Trump administration to withhold from revoking daca and establishing a humane solution DACA recipients. President
Trump is expected to announce his finalized decision on whether to keep DACA or
rescind it, Tuesday September 5th.
This
article was written by Tal Kopan and Jim Acosta, it was written on September 1st,
the purpose of the article was to give the reader insight into the DACA
controversy as it escalates and to allow the reader to look at the controversy
from Paul Ryan’s perspective. The article remained neutral about the DACA controversy;
it simply stated the facts granting the audience with proper information to
formulate their own opinion.
The president's power to issue executive orders comes from the U.S. Constitution and congress. If a President issues an executive order that appears unconstitutional and Congress lets the order pass, congress is violating
their oath to protect the Constitution. Therefore
President Obama was allowed to make an executive order to enact DACA, because
Obama’s executive order is constitutional. Yet if congress felt it wasn’t and
still allowed the order to pass, they’re the ones at fault for violating the
constitution.
Yet republicans argue that
the constitution gives congress, not the president, the authority to determine
who may legally enter and reside in the United States. Former President Obama
implemented DACA, without working through congress. This leads many republicans
to believe that DACA is “unconstitutional”, yet if DACA gets revoked due to
being “unconstitutional” it will negatively impact hundreds and thousands of
young immigrants, instead of benefiting them if the DACA policy were to be kept”.
With the information I’ve enquired from the article, I came to the realization that
just because something may be unconstitutional doesn’t mean its wrong depending
on the situation and just because something is constitutional doesn’t mean its right
depending on the situation. Analyzing this article I’ve came to the conclusion
that distinguishing what’s constitutional from morals is extremely relevant to today,
its highly important that are generation remembers to not trade humanity for
patriotism.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/01/politics/paul-ryan-daca-trump-immigration/index.html
Yessss Maddy
ReplyDelete