FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Thus Spake Obama

by FAISAL MOGHUL

He came, he saw, he betrayed!

Barack Obama campaigned on the twin themes of hope and change. His soothing sales pitch reassured both America and the world that his administration would mark a stark difference from the previous one; that diplomacy, transparency and respect for the rule of law would be his creed, unlike the secrecy and utter disdain for the constitution that was the hallmark of the Bush-Cheney era.

But actions speak louder than words.

From his continuation of the Bush-era policies of torture, mass surveillance and indefinite detention to his refusal to shut down Guantanamo Bay, from military misadventures in Libya waged without Congressional authorization to using “kill lists” for targeted assassinations — one cannot ignore the striking dissonance between candidate Obama’s promises on one hand, and President Obama’s actions on the other.

With every passing day in power, the former University of Chicago professor of constitutional law seems to be forgetting the same constitutional principles of separation of powers and checks and balances that he not only taught his students for a decade but also fervently advocated for during his campaign.

To quote William Safire, “on what legal meat does this our Ceaser feed?”

The latest in this series of constitutional nightmares comes in the form of an executive decree to temporarily suspend the deportation of illegal aliens in the United States if they were brought here before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school, or served in the military. This is even though just over two years ago the U.S. senate considered a similar proposal, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, which failed to garner the required 60 votes needed to become law.

Obama’s back-door DREAM Act simply ignores the will of congress by implementing some parts of the bill that Congress expressly rejected. Having lived under the tyranny of King George III, the founding fathers were wary of giving the executive too much power, which is why Madison forewarned future generations in Federalist 47 that “there can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person.”

Lest you think this is nitpicking over constitutional niceties, remember that Obama himself admitted this exact point last year, that the executive cannot unilaterally suspend deportations, and that any changes in the immigration framework will have to be handled through Congress:

With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.

There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.1

Madison is probably rolling in his grave!

Of course, supporters of this executive order will contend that there is ample historical precedent supporting this executive order. It is true that President Jimmy Carter exercised his executive authority to allow Cubans into the United States in 1980, President Bill Clinton did the same in 1994, and recently, in May 2010, Obama’s administration granted parole (allowing non-citizens to remain in the US lawfully) to spouses, parents and children of U.S. citizens serving in the military.

The point of this article is not to attack immigrants. Temporarily suspending the deportation of the children of illegal immigrants, who were brought to the United States for no fault of their own, is a humane and just use of executive power. Moreover, it will also allow the government to direct its resources to fixing more important aspects of the nation’s broken immigration system.

But noble intentions can never be a sound basis for judging the constitutionality or righteousness of government action, as the path to hell is always paved with good intentions.

And when the executive rides roughshod over the constitution for the sake of pre-election politicking, he ceases to fulfill his constitutional responsibility to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Faisal Moghul is  New York and DC licensed attorney practicing business, employment and immigration law in DC. 

Notes.

1 See http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/15/flashback-obama-said-he-wouldnt-do-executive-order-on-deportations-weve-got-three-branches-of-government/#ixzz1yG6Mjfh1

 

Weekend Edition
February 12-14, 2016
Andrew Levine
What Next in the War on Clintonism?
Jeffrey St. Clair
A Comedy of Terrors: When in Doubt, Bomb Syria
Ismael Hossein-Zadeh – Anthony A. Gabb
Financial Oligarchy vs. Feudal Aristocracy
Paul Street
When Plan A Meets Plan B: Talking Politics and Revolution with the Green Party’s Jill Stein
Rob Urie
The (Political) Season of Our Discontent
Pepe Escobar
It Takes a Greek to Save Europa
Gerald Sussman
Why Hillary Clinton Spells Democratic Party Defeat
Carol Norris
What Do Hillary’s Women Want? A Psychologist on the Clinton Campaign’s Women’s Club Strategy
Robert Fantina
The U.S. Election: Any Good News for Palestine?
Linda Pentz Gunter
Radioactive Handouts: the Nuclear Subsidies Buried Inside Obama’s “Clean” Energy Budget
Michael Welton
Lenin, Putin and Me
Manuel García, Jr.
Fire in the Hole: Bernie and the Cracks in the Neo-Liberal Lid
Thomas Stephens
The Flint River Lead Poisoning Catastrophe in Historical Perspective
David Rosen
When Trump Confronted a Transgender Beauty
Will Parrish
Cap and Clear-Cut
Victor Grossman
Coming Cutthroats and Parting Pirates
Ben Terrall
Raw Deals: Challenging the Sharing Economy
David Yearsley
Beyoncé’s Super Bowl Formation: Form-Fitting Uniforms of Revolution and Commerce
David Mattson
Divvying Up the Dead: Grizzly Bears in a Post-ESA World
Matthew Stevenson
Confessions of a Primary Insider
Jeff Mackler
Friedrichs v. U.S. Public Employee Unions
Franklin Lamb
Notes From Tehran: Trump, the Iranian Elections and the End of Sanctions
Pete Dolack
More Unemployment and Less Security
Christopher Brauchli
The Cruzifiction of Michael Wayne Haley
Bill Quigley
Law on the Margins: a Profile of Social Justice Lawyer Chaumtoli Huq
Uri Avnery
A Lady With a Smile
Katja Kipping
The Opposite of Transparency: What I Didn’t Read in the TIPP Reading Room
B. R. Gowani
Hellish Woman: ISIS’s Granny Endorses Hillary
Kent Paterson
The Futures of Whales and Humans in Mexico
Michael Howard
Hollywood’s Grotesque Animal Abuse
James Heddle
Why the Current Nuclear Showdown in California Should Matter to You
Steven Gorelick
Branding Tradition: a Bittersweet Tale of Capitalism at Work
Nozomi Hayase
Assange’s UN Victory and Redemption of the West
Patrick Bond
World Bank Punches South Africa’s Poor, by Ignoring the Rich
Mel Gurtov
Is US-Russia Engagement Still Possible?
Dan Bacher
Governor Jerry Brown Receives Cold, Dead Fish Award Four Years In A Row
Wolfgang Lieberknecht
Fighting and Protecting Refugees
Jennifer Matsui
Doglegs, An Unforgettable Film
Soud Sharabani
Israeli Myths: An Interview with Ramzy Baroud
Terry Simons
Bernie? Why Not?
Missy Comley Beattie
When Thoughtful People Think Illogically
Christy Rodgers
Everywhere is War: Luke Mogelson’s These Heroic, Happy Dead: Stories
Ron Jacobs
Springsteen: Rockin’ the House in Albany, NY
Barbara Nimri Aziz
“The Martian”: This Heroism is for Chinese Viewers Too
Charles R. Larson
No Brainers: When Hitler Took Cocaine and Lenin Lost His Brain
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail