Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does seem overly complicated to me. If my parents stood money from a bank or embezzled a bunch of money and gave it me I do not get to keep it; or do I?

I just do not see what the big deal is to have the kids go through the normal immigration process, or am I missing some other part of this debate?

I think that's correct: If the people covered by DACA (passed in 20120 just went through the normal immigration process wouldn't they be citizens by now?

sorry: passed in 2012

Anonymous wrote:This does seem overly complicated to me. If my parents stood money from a bank or embezzled a bunch of money and gave it me I do not get to keep it; or do I?

I just do not see what the big deal is to have the kids go through the normal immigration process, or am I missing some other part of this debate?

I think that's correct: If the people covered by DACA (passed in 20120 just went through the normal immigration process wouldn't they be citizens by now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does seem overly complicated to me. If my parents stood money from a bank or embezzled a bunch of money and gave it me I do not get to keep it; or do I?

I just do not see what the big deal is to have the kids go through the normal immigration process, or am I missing some other part of this debate?

It isn't the kids fault the parents broke the law. They were educated here, associate as being Americans, many serve in the military. We have invested millions in taxpayer education dollars and these folks have returned many millions more in productivity and taxes. What possible benefit is there to deporting them now?

this. from a not super-liberal person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will note that all DACA does is protect them from deportation and make them eligible for work permits. It does NOT make them citizens.

The DREAM act provides a path to citizenship for them. Not automatic citizenship, but rather a path to it.

And allows all sorts of other benefits at the expense of other legal immigrants and citizens.

What benefits do they get that other legal immigrants and citizens do not?

The opportunity to naturalize without going through the hassle that the others did.

"Y'all are desperately trying to rewriting the office of the American Presidency, the election of 2016, and you will fail based on the Constitution and precedent. You have perfected that boomerang throw. So. Dumb."

Sorry: I meant to direct my last paragraph towards those who seek to impeach my president, not your post. I got a little carried away...apologies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does seem overly complicated to me. If my parents stood money from a bank or embezzled a bunch of money and gave it me I do not get to keep it; or do I?

I just do not see what the big deal is to have the kids go through the normal immigration process, or am I missing some other part of this debate?

I am assuming you are asking these questions genuinely. Suppose you adopt a child from say, China, and bring that child (may be months old or a toddler) into the U.S. for living with you. The child had no say in your bringing the child to the U.S. Then you bring the child up to be an adult in the U.S. The child knows only the American society and life in the U.S. All known people to the child are in the U.S. only. The child never visited China, doesn't know anyone in China, and may or may not speak Chinese language. After the child became an adult, having graduated from a college, gainfully employed, and never committed any crime, suppose the Government says you should send the now adult back to China (suppose your earlier adoption process had a flaw and so deemed invalid) and should follow existing immigration procedures to come back to the U.S. and not rely on your sponsorship (since parents of DACA children are themselves unauthorized to live in the U.S. they can't sponsor DACA children for U.S. citizenship).

How would you feel? How would your now grown adopted son/daughter feel?

I don't think you can compare legal adoption (where you go through months, sometimes years of paperwork and legal processes, even though years later a flaw might show up) to the DACA thing (where the parents always knew they came into the country illegally, and there was never ever any presumption of legality along the way).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does seem overly complicated to me. If my parents stood money from a bank or embezzled a bunch of money and gave it me I do not get to keep it; or do I?

I just do not see what the big deal is to have the kids go through the normal immigration process, or am I missing some other part of this debate?

Republican here. From my point of view, it’s simple: we paid for their education and deserve to benefit from their skill sets. Makes zero sense to be to deport young people who speak perfect English, understand our customs and history, and have been through our public school system. That is throwing our money away.

Fine. Then why haven't Republicans nor Democrats had the political will to protect this group? We all know they are a bargaining chit. Our school district's education budget is astronomically high. It doesn't matter since our education budget in my county has been a source of angst since the first educational budget of $75,000 over a hundred and fifty years ago: had to educate the stonecutters' children. The stone masons were needed to build all the buildings in the new capital. Nothing's changed. Nothing.

What I find offensive is E.O. "protecting" these people, campaigning on protecting DACA recipients when the last administration just prolonged their agony. President Trump nullified the E.O. - in order to settle their anxiety once and for all - and these jerks sue him for nullifying a precious President's e.o.? For he love of God...it is times, such as these, I wish I never studied political science.

Y'all are desperately trying to rewriting the office of the American Presidency, the election of 2016, and you will fail based on the Constitution and precedent. You have perfected that boomerang throw. So. Dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does seem overly complicated to me. If my parents stood money from a bank or embezzled a bunch of money and gave it me I do not get to keep it; or do I?

I just do not see what the big deal is to have the kids go through the normal immigration process, or am I missing some other part of this debate?

Republican here. From my point of view, it’s simple: we paid for their education and deserve to benefit from their skill sets. Makes zero sense to be to deport young people who speak perfect English, understand our customs and history, and have been through our public school system. That is throwing our money away.

So true.

SCOTUS should rule that what Trump did in overturning Obama's EO was legal due to separation of power.
If they don't, it sets very dangerous precedent for presidents in the future when it comes to EOs and Conogress' power to write law.

Trump is NOT going to deport the DACA people. He wants Congress to find a solution - because that is their job.

again, we are talking about real human beings here. People who were brought here as children and only know this country. It is just cruel to force them back to a country they never knew that is probably dangerous and violent.

Then work to change the law. But don't tell us that we shouldn't enforce the rule of law just because you don't like it.

I personlly think that we need to let more people into this country legally, but I am not about to advocate for those who want to come here (or already have come here) illegally.

Anonymous wrote:The issue is they could get deported back to a country they don’t know or have any connection to. This gives them safety. What’s your problem with that?

I support some form of protection for the Dreamers - only because they did not have a choice when their parents brought them here.

But the problem is that once one offers them protection, you can bet the next demand will be to safeguard their parents from deportation and then those who are just here illegally should also be protected, etc.

Anonymous wrote:This does seem overly complicated to me. If my parents stood money from a bank or embezzled a bunch of money and gave it me I do not get to keep it; or do I?

I just do not see what the big deal is to have the kids go through the normal immigration process, or am I missing some other part of this debate?

Republican here. From my point of view, it’s simple: we paid for their education and deserve to benefit from their skill sets. Makes zero sense to be to deport young people who speak perfect English, understand our customs and history, and have been through our public school system. That is throwing our money away.

again, we are talking about real human beings here. People who were brought here as children and only know this country. It is just cruel to force them back to a country they never knew that is probably dangerous and violent.

This is not encouraging others to break the law. This is a subset of people, mostly adults now.

This is true for the current version of DACA. The encouragement to illegally enter with children comes from the idea that we (the US) might be willing to do this again in the future. It's sort of like negotiating with terrorists. If we do it once, we will be expected to do it again in the future.

This is not encouraging others to break the law. This is a subset of people, mostly adults now.

"To be eligible, recipients must be present in the United States unlawfully after being brought in as children[41][42] before their 16th birthday and prior to June 2007, be currently in school, a high school graduate or be honorably discharged from the military, be under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012, and not have been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor or three other misdemeanors, or otherwise pose a threat to national security. The program does not currently provide permanent lawful status or a path to citizenship,[43] nor does it provide eligibility for federal welfare or student aid.[6]"