The Great Immigration Betrayal

Ross Douthat, New York Times, November 15, 2014

In the months since President Obama first seem poised–as he now seems poised again–to issue a sweeping executive amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants, we’ve learned two important things about how this administration approaches its constitutional obligations.

First, we now have a clear sense of the legal arguments that will be used to justify the kind of move Obama himself previously described as a betrayal of our political order. They are, as expected, lawyerly in the worst sense, persuasive only if abstracted from any sense of precedent or proportion or political normality.

Second, we now have a clearer sense of just how anti-democratically this president may be willing to proceed.

The legal issues first. The White House’s case is straightforward: It has “prosecutorial discretion” in which illegal immigrants it deports, it has precedent-grounded power to protect particular groups from deportation, and it has statutory authority to grant work permits to those protected. Therefore, there can be no legal bar to applying discretion, granting protections and issuing work permits to roughly half the illegal-immigrant population.

This argument’s logic, at once consistent and deliberately obtuse, raises one obvious question: Why stop at half? (Activists are already asking.) After all, under this theory of what counts as faithfully executing the law, all that matters is that somebody, somewhere, is being deported; anyone and everyone else can be allowed to work and stay. So the president could “temporarily” legalize 99.9 percent of illegal immigrants and direct the Border Patrol to hand out work visas to every subsequent border crosser, so long as a few thousand aliens were deported for felonies every year.

The reality is there is no agreed-upon limit to the scope of prosecutorial discretion in immigration law because no president has attempted anything remotely like what Obama is contemplating. {snip}

{snip} No defender of Obama’s proposed move has successfully explained why it wouldn’t be a model for a future president interested in unilateral rewrites of other areas of public policy (the tax code, for instance) where sweeping applications of “discretion” could achieve partisan victories by fiat. {snip}

Especially debates in which the executive branch is effectively acting in direct defiance of the electoral process. This is where the administration has entered extraordinarily brazen territory, since part of its original case for taking these steps was that they supposedly serve the public will, which only yahoos and congressional Republicans oppose.

This argument was specious before; now it looks ridiculous. {snip}


{snip} He once campaigned on constitutionalism and executive restraint; he once abjured exactly this power. There is still time for him to respect the limits of his office, the lines of authority established by the Constitution, the outcome of the last election.

Or he can choose the power grab, and the accompanying disgrace.

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.
  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    Andrew McCarthy, former federal prosecutor (Kelly File, 11-7-14):

    “. . . As far as ‘prosecutorial discretion’ is concerned . . . it should be an unremarkable resource allocation doctrine that basically means you can’t prosecute every single crime. Nor would we want to live in a society where that happened. So you have to take your finite resources and apply it to the most serious crime.

    “The President does not use prosecutorial discretion for that purpose. He uses it in a policy-related manner to basically countermand or contradict the laws that Congress enacts, and he’s got a constitutional obligation to execute those laws faithfully. So it’s really not a proper use of prosecutorial discretion . . .”

    • Betsy Julio

      Gina Tingles If you think Richard`s story is amazing,, last month my uncles step-son basically also brought home $7387 sitting there fourty hours a month an their house and they‘re co-worker‘s step-mother`s neighbour did this for 7-months and got paid more than $7387 part-time on line. applie the guide on this web-site,…C&#97&#x73&#104&#83&#116&#111&#x72&#101d&#46&#x43&#111&#77

  • dmxinc

    I’m getting sick and tired of see the words “Republican Presidents did it too.”

    What insane argument is that? We all see the results of what they did and it was disastrous.

    So now we are supposed to give a Democrat the same chance to screw up our country further?

    The Left will use whatever inane argument it takes to forward their anti-American (anit-White) agenda.

    They know full well that if we could go back, we would stop those Republicans too, but they word articles as though we thought it was OK when Republicans did it.

    • none of your business

      Every President has been bad for Whites since Eisenhower.

      • Whitesneedtobebrave

        Lyndon Johnson and Carter were the worst. Oh my bad, Billy boy Clinton tops it.

        • Juggernaut3000

          President Wilson tops all of them combined.

          • bilderbuster

            He surrendered our treasury and currency to a hostile alien power.

      • Juggernaut3000

        Every President has been bad for Whites since President Wilson.


          What group of people immigrated to the USA right before the outbreak of WWI and got a hold of our government, created the Federal Reserve and other big alphabet agencies that have grown since then? The same ‘tribe’ that gets us in all their wars? You know. The J group

          • Juggernaut3000

            Of course you are right.

            Wilson was the first puppet.

            “Jacob Schiff then came back to New York, (He was at that time head of The American Jewish Committee), and in my father’s home, in the presence of many prominent men, they decided to get rid of President Taft. They also made plans to get rid of the Republican Party and put in their own party and their own President.

            They set up the National Democratic Headquarters at 200 Fifth Avenue and Henry Morgenthau Sr. was made chairman of the Finance Committee. I was made his assistant. I saw everything that went on because I handled all the books. Jacob Schiff and the Jews started looking around for a man to put up as President. They got Woodrow Wilson, a rascal who wasn’t worth the powder to blow him to hell!”

            – Benjamin Freedman

        • PvtCharlieSlate

          I’m curious …
          In what way was Calvin Coolidge “bad for Whites”?

    • Gina Tingles

      But the Republican presidents did not do it. Those Republican presidents signed legislation that was duly passed by Congress. This president is not signing any legislation, he is acting on executive fiat.

      • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

        Gina, Reagan and Bush I did, by executive order, exempt family members (children, spouses) of people already given legal status. They did not attempt — as Obama seeks to do — to grant exemption from deportation to people unrelated to people here legally. See:

        AP To Republicans: Reagan Granted An Administrative Amnesty, So Shut Up About Obama’s Amnesty, By Allan Wall at VDARE

  • Luca

    “Or he can choose the power grab, and the accompanying disgrace.”

    HA! It is not possible to disgrace this man. He is deep into the kool-aid well of liberalism and thinks anything and everything he does is justifiable because he is pursuing an agenda that is above the intellectual capacity of all us common folk. He takes the criticism in stride and moves on to the next item on the agenda.

    He is a steamroller of Leftist destruction and no one has the intestinal fortitude to stop him.

  • MekongDelta69

    Wait! Did I just read an article in The New York Slimes (semi-)bashing their omniscient black Dear Leader?

    Are my eyes deceiving me?!?

    • TruthBeTold

      I think even they see the vast over-reach of unilateral amnesty and it scares them a little as it sets a precedent for any future Republican President.

    • Juggernaut3000

      The author is their token “conservative” writer.

  • none of your business

    Democratically??? Does anyone know if it is correct to make a noun into an adverb? I don’t think so.

    • Yancy Derringer

      Democracy (noun)
      Democratic (adjective)
      Democratically (adverb)

      Perfectly fine.

  • Sick of it

    Blacks don’t respect limits. In fact, they consider you weak if you do. Our people need to learn from the suffering of the post-Apartheid Afrikaner.


      Too many self-hating and naïve whites out here today to understand or accept that reality.

    • Max

      Our people have been taught that “Apartheid = Holocaust”. They have been taught error upon error for decades now. An incorrect response is a logical outcome of incorrect inputs. GIGO and here we are.

      • PvtCharlieSlate

        In this context, GIGO stands for “Garbage In, Gospel Out”.

  • IKUredux

    Obama is doing exactly what he promised: to fundamentally change America. And he has, and he’s not done. He needs to be stopped. I always thought that group that calls itself BAMN, was an interesting name. IMPEACH obama.

    • TruthBeTold

      He is trying to govern as close to a dictator as is possible; and it’s what blacks expect.

      • Max

        It is the natural form of government for blacks. Look to Africa. They expect a tribal chief who arbitrarily decides what is good and evil, bad magic and good magic and invest all authority in him and the medicine man/woman. A savage to rule savages by fiat; makes perfect sense in their small minds.


          Blacks are too stupid to see that adding more Hispanics, Asians and Arabs will be bad for them as they don’t have the altruism, guilt, self hate and delusional views on blacks and race in general that so many whites have. No more affirmative action for blacks. No more welfare for blacks. No more concern for ‘police brutality’ for blacks. No more masses of whites that will rally for them; by then, those whites will be dead or converted into white nationalists like us.

  • none of your business

    No President has attempted anything remotely like what Obama is contemplating. Really?
    Let’s see; Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus for his entire term. He kept forty thousand editors and publishers in jail for his entire term for fear that they might oppose the war. Nixon created section 8 which is all set to destroy the more remote rural areas and wealthiest suburbs. He also created the Hispanic race by executive order in time for the 1970 census. He also turned affirmative action from a quota system for unqualified blacks to a no Whites apply system.
    At least Presidents can be voted out for their second term and only serve 8 years. Unelected, life long tenure udges like Breyer, Sotomayer, Kagan and Darth Vader Ginsburg and the unspeakable Brennan are in there for life. It was one unelected lifelong tenure Judge, Brennan who decided affirmative action on the basis of 2 cases. Brennan created the laws that employers must hire totally unqualified blacks rather than superbly qualified Whites.
    Obama is bad, but our Judicial supremacy system has done worse things than any President could do.

    • TruthBeTold

      What’s important is that we now set clear limits.

      The Republicans should be making this a major issue.

      Unfortunately, many of them want ‘immigration reform’ so they’ve lost a great deal of credibility to speak out on this issue.


      True, but I think the difference is, because of internet and social media, we can see much bad stuff and lies that were told to us by governments and leaders. I do NOT like Obama, but they’re pretty all bad. The only reason Obama is worse is because blacks hate whites and use their power against whites and the liberals thought having a black in office that they could scream racism all the time and it would shut people up. Blacks and other nonwhites in power has been the best recruitment tool for waking up many whites; far more than I or any of these pro-white websites or groups could do.

    • I disagree with your statement on Lincoln. He allowed his military commanders to suspend Habeas Corpus on April 1861 for the region between Washington DC and Philadelphia. Congress was out of session, DC was very close to the North-South border and rioters were preventing trains of troops to reach DC.

      As soon as Congress reconveined Lincoln put the question to them and they eventually provided Lincoln with the authority to suspend Habeas Corpus during the duration of the Civil War.

      It appears that this was used primarily for persons attempting to materially disrupt the Union war effort. I don’t know the number but it appears to be substantially smaller than 40,000. It does not appear that newspapers were prosecuted under this, as the contempoary literature is full of articles and cartoons excoriating Lincoln and his direction of the war. The below cartoon was published in 1864 for example.

      With Obama, it does appear that his executive action is taken to circumvent Congress where Lincoln’s action was taken as an emergency measure while Congress was out of session.

      On the other hand it does appear that the US Judicial system is out of control. I recall California enacted Proposition 187 by a large majority, restricting illegal immigration and a Federal Judge ruled that it was unconstitutional and overturned it.

  • Yves Vannes

    This move is the “I hate Whitey” immigration act. Look at his history:

    Avoided whites as a youth and in college. Only associated with far lefties. Working in private industry was being “behind enemy lines”, as he put it.

    Named his autobiography “Dreams of my Father”. A bum and loser who abandoned him and whom he only met twice. If he were well adjusted he would have named the book “Dreams of my Grandmother”. In the book the hero, his father, was defeated (drink and suicide by drink) by the evil rich white male. His every act since he entered college has been a form of war-revenge upon the evil rich white male. Show me one that is not such an act.

    He is so obsessed by this that he is even willing to push amnesty inspite of the additional hardship it will cause poor blacks. That is how driven he is to stick it to the evil rich white male. He is seething after this last election.

    • George Costanza

      Hear! hear! It’s so blatantly obvious, it’s sickening!!

    • Max

      Frank Marshall Davis

    • LHathaway

      Aside from screwing every black on the planet. . . how was his father defeated by the evil rich white male? Obama’s father died in Kenya where he moved there (with the assumption of) positioning himself high in Kenya’s society. It’s been a while since I’ve read it, but that’s how I remember him from Dreams From my Father. I think I remember the title correctly, too.

      • Yves Vannes

        This is not a drama that takes place in the real world. It is the drama that takes place within Obama head and that which motivates him to do what he does.

    • Juggernaut3000

      The real and ultimate “I Hate Whitey” immigration act was the one LBJ signed in 1965.

      Those who wrote and authored the 1965 bill did, indeed, Hate Whitey. LBJ was doing what he was told, including looking the other way when the USS Liberty was attacked by a foreign country on June 8, 1967, killing 34 Americans and wounding another 174.

      • Max

        It is really painful every time I’ve heard one of those sailors from that day.

  • Bon, From the Land of Babble

    Blacks are hurt the very most by unfettered immigration, and that’s why they’re being distracted with rioting and looting in support of a thug like Michael Brown.

    Better to be diverted by communist agitators telling them the Great White Devil (that doesn’t exist) is their biggest enemy rather than masses of uneducated, low-skilled Hispanics who push them out of their neighborhoods and schools, take jobs from them and compete with them for shrinking resources from the government:

    Economists at Northeastern University have found that businesses are substituting immigrants for young American workers, especially for young black men. In fact, scholars estimate that immigration is the reason for one-third of the drop in employment among black men, and even some of the increase in incarceration.

    Blacks have been driven out of Los Angeles by Hispanics while their paid-for, Grade F- from NumbersUSA, black politicians continue tell them that it is Whites who are the cause of their poverty and misery.

    Blacks should take their anger and instead apply it against those who are harming them the most, like Obama for instance.

    • Max

      This assumes: 1. That this thought could even break through the abject hatred and resentment of whites which encapsulates every personal failing and 2. That they actually DESIRE employment.

      If they had any thought about it at all they *might* entertain the idea that they could potentially have to start sharing gibsmedats with the brown races if there are too many vying for the same “free” services.

      But they won’t.

      • Juggernaut3000

        Indeed. Blacks have been led down a primrose path by those who wish to destroy White America, and that includes black politicians and racial firebrands.

        Blacks are the perfect tools and useful idiots, emphasis on “idiot,” for the real agitators behind the lines who encourage their violent tendencies and appeal to their simple minds: “Everything Whites have was built on your backs, let ’em have it.”

        The implementation of a multicultural anti-White police state and authoritarian government that disempowers Whites is miserable for us; for blacks it will be far worse. Only Whites have been forced to tolerate their whining, violence, stupidity and lifelong welfare use. They will have one choice when their job is done and we Whites are a small, terrorized minority in our own homelands: deportation to Africa or elimination. My money is on elimination.


          In the near future, whites in the US will probably lose their cool with them. You’re seeing how whites in Europe are unarmed, no free speech, laws criminalizing them for making ‘hate speech’, yet still lately they are standing up to the invasion and it’s scaring the leaders there. They are making progress and they have nothing to defend themselves with and everything stacked against them. Even the most liberal, tolerant white nations (like France) are becoming more right wing. Look at National Front, Generation Identitaire, etc. Then you of course have more European countries becoming nationalistic.

        • Max

          If the Hispanics (essentially Mexico) has their way, I believe blacks will long for the days when “racist” whites were running the show. Mexicans will have much less “tolerance” for blacks. One way or another their heyday is coming to an end.

        • DougDeGrave

          “Jεwsful Idiots” lol


      Blacks don’t see that, plus those blacks that DO notice there is black-Hispanic fights attribute to something whites are doing and try to get the browns to ‘unite’ with them against whites.

  • Max

    We have a deliberative legal process. A law is not “illegitimate” simply because a majority may temporarily disapprove of it.

    Thank God.

  • M&S

    It’s blackness Rainer.
    Having achieved dominance as a function of tribal contest rather than popular election, Obama’s internal psyche cannot conceive of a condition by which his will is disobeyed and so he will push to the limits of his authority and count on black-victim entitlement (which is really white self-intimidation psychology at the distorted vs. real meaning of ‘racism’) to keep us all cowed.
    That suggestion is an implanted burr in the mind of White Americans who choose not to self-irritate themselves in contemplating it and dissolving it’s undue influence upon our reason.
    Politically, the lack of wisdom here is more clear.
    With DACA and DREAM Obama brought tens of thousands of grey haired ‘children’ and ‘College Wannabes’ to this nation. Ontop of an already million+ legal/illegal influx of The Horde populations.
    No self-interested black would ever allow his already menialized people to be competed out of existence by the breeding profligacy and utter disregard for racial concerns exhibited by Hispanics who will undercut them economically and use superior violence to displace them, every time.
    Thus, whatever he is planning, ‘with help’, he has to be either unaware of the logical consequences of (stupid) or interested in some bigger agenda that outweighs, not just white but black and Native American interests as the indigene peoples of this country (personal profit motive).
    No one who engages in an uncultured act outside the realms of conservative social expectation and without merit for those whose consequences the act will be deleterious to, should be trusted on the face of their decision.
    This is the truth of what the blacks and Hispanics have to look forward to, even if they are somehow ‘in agreement’ that it would be a good idea to share majority dominance over whites:
    When whites reach a certain critical, minimum threshold, number; too small to sustain the society we racially invented for ourselves, America will crumble and collapse and they will not enjoy the benefits of IPods or Nikes or Welfare or EBT that it provides them.
    And what is left will look like Mexico City or Kibera or Dharavi within two generations as racial groups whose genetic algorithm is that of subsidence to the mean and an entropy norm of social failure HG or early Agrarian, will achieve their least.
    Whoever (YKW) promised them a more racially favorable outcome to white minoritization of our own lands is lying to them.
    And THOSE are the ‘advisors’, in the shadows, whom we must worry about. Because nothing in Obama’s actions shows that he understands the outcome of his initial act.
    Not for ‘His People’. Not for us.

  • Jake Frizzell

    Illegals who were part of the ‘Reagan Amnesty’ are still illegals IMO. After digging up and burning Reagan’s corpse (among many others) I would give all illegals, their families and their supporters 72 hours to leave the country or be exterminated. Imagine that ‘giant sucking sound’ south of the border!

  • scutum

    Like most blacks, Obummer hates whites. Like most socialists/communists, he hates the United States. So he is killing two birds with one stone, he is disenfranchising whites and destroying the United States. One additional point: Have you seen the make -up of the Ferguson protesters? Many of them, if not the majority, are white.These are the type of idiots that voted for him and I hope they get to someday experience the joys of diversity up close and personal someday.

  • scutum

    One additional thought, if they authorities really wanted to break up the crowds in Ferguson they should fly over the city dropping job applications. Me thinks the crowds would disappear right quick.

  • Realist

    The Republicans have allowed the current administration to get away with every crime they have commited. And they will continue to.allow anything Obama wants.Gun running, Benghazi, IRS and all the rest the Republicans just talk and do nothing.

  • crockadoodle6

    I don’t understand the argument that ‘blacks are the group hurt most by Hispanic immigration’. That concept assumes blacks want to work, they don’t. It also assumes the government will somehow divert $ from blacks to the Hispanics. No way. The blacks are the ultimate protected species. They would be Darwinian memories without white support and whites will continue to give blacks money, ‘make believe’ jobs, promotions, free passes, admissions and worship despite illegal Hispanics. It also assumes that blacks will lose political power. Their concept of political power is a temper tantrum. Blacks aren’t resisting immigration because Obama himself is the black messiah and supports immigration. And Hispanics are brown. Blacks don’t hate them as much as they hate whites. So ‘the enemy of my enemy…deal’. Finally, blacks aren’t remotely capable of the political calculus that predicts what happens when a brown group of citizens unburdened by white guilt and slavery become active. Hispanics hate blacks. Like every other group in the world does. So it all comes back in a circle. In the end the blacks are still the entertainers, clowns and the main reason for robust and solid jail cells.