Napolitano: DHS Authorizing Illegal Aliens to Work in U.S.

Edwin Mora, CNS News, October 20, 2011

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that under the administration’s policy of exercising “prosecutorial discretion” in the enforcement of the immigration laws, her department is currently authorizing some illegal aliens to work in the United States.

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, asked Napolitano: “According to the information from your department, some individuals who are given relief will obtain work authorizations. So people with no right to be in the country will be allowed to work here. Is that correct?”

Napolitano said: “Well, senator, since around 1986 there has been a process where those who are technically unlawfully in the country may apply for work authorization. This goes to CIS [Citizenship and Immigration Services]. It’s not an ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] or CBP [Customs and Border Protection] function. And those cases are reviewed by CIS in a case-by-case basis. So there’s no change in that process. Like I said, that goes back to the mid-80s that is contemplated now.”

Sen. Grassley then asked, “But yes, some of them could have an opportunity to work here even though they are here illegally?”

“Well, that happens now, senator,” said Napolitano.

{snip}

Although Napolitano did not specify what 1986 policy she was referring to in her response to Sen. Grassley, President Ronald Reagan signed the Simpson-Mazzoli Act into law in November of that year. The act applied to illegal aliens who requested a change of status within 18 months of the law’s passage and who had come into the United States prior to Jan. 1, 1982, and had resided in America since that time.

{snip}

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Question Diversity

    Napolitano said: “Well, senator, since around 1986 there has been a process where those who are technically unlawfully in the country may apply for work authorization.

    Reagan’s 1986 IRCA Amnesty, I bet. This is a perfect comeback on her part, knowing that a Reaganite was quizzing her.

  • June

    So the longer you’re here unlawfully, the more you’re rewarded. I don’t recall at any time in our history when so many Benedict Arnolds have been gathered in one spot – Washington

  • Southern Hoosier

    “The purpose of the “prosecutorial discretion” policy is to remove the worst offenders…”

    Sounds good. But without border enforcement, what is to stop them returning? Is the border patrol going to be required to check the criminal status of illegals entering this country?

    “….who had come into the United States prior to Jan. 1, 1982, and had resided in America since that time.”

    And just how many of these illegals she is giving work permits to have been in resident since 1982?

    And the comeback to her should of been, “Yes that is true, we tried amnesty in 1986. It didn’t work then and it won’t work now.”

  • BEBE

    The debate on CNN the other night should give us a clue of how dense Anderson and the GOP hopefuls really are about the 14th Amendment. In fact all Americans are clueless and have bought into the lies they have been told about “anchor babies”. Not only that, but the 1965 Immigration Act was another unconstitutional act of war against White America.

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/41447

  • Cui Bono?

    In fact all Americans are clueless and have bought into the lies they have been told about ‘anchor babies’.

    Did you say ALL Americans are clueless and have bought into the lies?

    Are you kidding? Do you think we “ALL” are stupid, clueless or perhaps both?

    Do not include me in your definition of “all”, I am well aware of the meaning of the 14th Amendment and the intentions of its authors. And, there are many Americans who are just like me that highly resent the way the left AND right have twisted the 14th’s meaning. Those who insist that the interpretation of the 14th Amendment makes instant US citizens of any and all who are “lucky” enough to be born on US soil are pro-white genocide. They work for the race-replacement of whites, and this includes the media, especially CNN and jerks like Anderson.

    The GOP “hopefuls” are not dense about the 14th amendment; they well know its meaning and know it was not intended to include the children of illegal Third Worlders. They know most American citizens highly resent Third World anchor babies, the cheapening of American Citizenship and the burden these welfare ATMs place on the economy.

    But if the candidates were to mention any of this, however, their campaigns would be instantly derailed. NOT one of the major candidates supports ending birthright citizenship, even the best of the candidates on immigration, Bachman, is wishy washy on the anchor baby issue. Her grade from Numbers USA, the highest on the slate, is only a B – . The rest are much worse: C- : Romney and Cain, D- : Perry and Gingrich, F: Paul.

    http://goo.gl/qDM9x

    And better inquiry would be WHY the GOP candidates do not vehemently oppose birth-right citizenship.

  • Impeach Earl Warren

    The way I understand it, birthright citizens of illegal parents comes from a footnote to a supreme dork ruling that interprets the 14th. The clear intention of this amendment was to grant citizenship to blacks and not birthrights for third world illegals.

    Also, I believe it is still the law that anchor citizens can be deported back to their home country with their parents. When the kid turns 18 he can choose to be a USC if he so wants. But, I think the law hasn’t been enforced in years. Cain says that we don’t need anymore immigration laws, just enforce the ones we have. I doubt he would enforce this one.

    The 14th amendment was not even legally adopted. The southern states along with a couple of northern ones (I believe NJ and OR) balked. Since there wasn’t enough support to make the amendment part of the Constitution, the southern states were, in essence, kicked out of the Union. Ironically, this is what they wanted anyway.

    With the south disenfranchised, the 14th easily became legal. The radical Republicans then issued forth their “reconstruction” efforts. Quickly a guerrilla terror war ensued which ended in the defeat of the northern occupation army and their black auxiliaries in 1875. The accountants pulled the plug.

    Until the late 1950s the north didn’t bother with the south for fear of reigniting the guerrilla campaign. Then came the useless and gutless IKE and the equally useless Earl Warren and rest is a sorry history. The south was again placed under “reconstruction” where it remains today.

    Of the GOP candidates I believe that Newt understands the 14th amendment and its misuse. But being the great RINO he is, he will say nothing.

    I wonder how fast the birthright loophole would be closed if large numbers of babies were being born in the US to illegal Russian or white SA immigrants.

  • Pips

    Something very bad has to happen to whites before they start seeing themselves threatened as a group. How bad ? Bad enough to be unmanageable by the MSM, which would be awful damn bad.

  • Anonymous

    5 — Cui Bono? wrote at 8:21 PM on October 22:

    In fact all Americans are clueless and have bought into the lies they have been told about ‘anchor babies’.

    Did you say ALL Americans are clueless and have bought into the lies?

    Are you kidding? Do you think we “ALL” are stupid, clueless or perhaps both?

    ——————————————-

    Well, excuse me……I meant to type “MOST” all Americans but sometimes we hit post before re-reading what we wrote. Take that into consideration sometime. I know SOME Americans understand what it means even though I put, all….

  • margaret

    I caught a news flash this weekend. Supposedly anyone can become a legal resident by buying a certain amount of real estate in the US.

    Those homes in foreclosure due to the mortgage melt down will not be sold to regular American buyers. They will be marketed overseas to foreigners. The purchase will get them a green card.

    The news flash did not say if a down payment would be required.

    I could not find anything on the internet about this.