The current occupant of the White House seems to have a serious issue with dealing with right and wrong – particularly when it comes to abiding to the laws of the United States regarding illegal immigrants. Many of us have heard of his aunt who has been in the country for years illegally. As evident by his silence and inaction he sees nothing wrong with it. Ever since claiming the seat as head of the United States’ Executive Branch Mr. Obama has done everything to further weaken and outright subvert the Constitution and federal laws pertaining to immigration to favor Mexican nationals who are in the U.S illegally that was started by G.W Bush; only with unprecedented vigor.
On June 15th with just the swipe of his pen he created law granting millions of young Mexican/Latino nationals who are in the country illegally virtual amnesty by amending the Immigration & Customs Enforcement Agency [I.C.E] by unilaterally, without any vote of the Congress, removing the enforcement element of the agency regarding young illegals. ICE will no longer look to deport young illegals between the ages of 15 and 30 years of age who have been in the country illegally for as little as 5 years without committing a serious crime, outside of being in the country illegally.
While many of us may get emotionally lost in the haze of not punishing the young for the possible sins of their parents for coming and staying in the country illegally, we should not lose sight of the real issue of the moral integrity of those entrusted to make our nation’s laws and those who are to enforce them. Is it right under any circumstances for the President of the United States, or any legislature, to ignore established law for political expediency? Do the American people or U.S citizenry no long require their elected official to be of the highest ethical and moral character, to be able to tell right and wrong?
In previous generations it was said that two wrongs don’t make right. Though one could argue whether it is right or wrong to punish the child of a parent who does something illegal. But, the very word illegal states that something has been done against the law. There is established law already on the books. The Federal Immigration and Nationality Act [FINA] Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii), definitively states, “Any person who . . . encourages or induces an alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.” Under Section 274A(a)(1)(A) of FINA,“A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.” Should not someone be punished; if not the children of the lawbreaker, then the actual lawbreaker-the parent, or whomever brought him into the country, housed him, and give them aid and comfort? Does the law matter anymore really? In fact the Obama edict does state the illegal immigrant youth has to be a child of an illegal immigrant, between the ages of 15 and 30 and at least 5 years presence, illegally, within the U.S. So therefore, the youth come have crossed the border at the age of 17 or 25 to become eligible for Obama’s amnesty. Is this right or just? What are the consequences to be on a national economy that’s already suffering from high unemployment and unprecedented federal deficit? I can tell you that it won’t be good.
The actions of Executive Branch creating de facto law and circumventing the constitutional law-making authority of the Congress for no reason other than to garner political favor from a segment of the population should make us all pause with great concern. The famous French classical liberal theorist, political economist of the 1800’s Frederic Bastiat said once, “No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree.” If the Executive Branch can do this just on the whim of what it perceives just and right could it not create laws to release the nation’s natural resources to make us energy independent, cut corporate and personal taxes to make the nation the investment destination of the world and economic powerhouse, or make government schools graduates proficient in reading, writing, the sciences, and civics /America history to be in the to five academically worldwide again? Or could it too create laws to lock-up, or kill, Americans for just looking wrong or saying something politically unpopular, transfer American wealth and infrastructure to foreign lands and hands, or maybe increase taxes and regulations on the citizens and corporations to make us insolvent, irregardless of the people’s opinion? Think about that. What laws are to be respected by those who are in charge of executing and enforcing them? Should each branch of the government start acting as though it is not answerable to the other? The Constitution was created by the Founders to restrain the powers of the branches of the federal government through “check and balances”, but if the final checker of power the people of America and the United States are unable themselves to differentiate between what is right and wrong they cannot demand that from their elected representatives.