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

 

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

Weekend Edition
August 26, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Louisa Willcox
The Unbearable Killing of Yellowstone’s Grizzlies: 2015 Shatters Records for Bear Deaths
Paul Buhle
In the Shadow of the CIA: Liberalism’s Big Embarrassing Moment
Rob Urie
Crisis and Opportunity
Charles Pierson
Wedding Crashers Who Kill
Richard Moser
What is the Inside/Outside Strategy?
Dirk Bezemer – Michael Hudson
Finance is Not the Economy
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Bernie’s Used Cars
Margaret Kimberley
Hillary and Colin: the War Criminal Charade
Patrick Cockburn
Turkey’s Foray into Syria: a Gamble in a Very Dangerous Game
Ishmael Reed
Birther Tries to Flim Flam Blacks  
Brian Terrell
What Makes a Hate Group?
Andrew Levine
How Donald Trump Can Still be a Hero: Force the Guardians of the Duopoly to Open Up the Debates
Howard Lisnoff
Trouble in Political Paradise
Terry Tempest Williams
Will Our National Parks Survive the Next 100 Years?
Ben Debney
The Swimsuit that Overthrew the State
Ashley Smith
Anti-imperialism and the Syrian Revolution
Andrew Stewart
Did Gore Throw the 2000 Election?
Vincent Navarro
Is the Nation State and Its Welfare State Dead? a Critique of Varoufakis
John Wight
Syria’s Kurds and the Wages of Treachery
Lawrence Davidson
The New Anti-Semitism: the Case of Joy Karega
Mateo Pimentel
The Affordable Care Act: A Litmus Test for American Capitalism?
Roger Annis
In Northern Syria, Turkey Opens New Front in its War Against the Kurds
David Swanson
ABC Shifts Blame from US Wars to Doctors Without Borders
Norman Pollack
American Exceptionalism: A Pernicious Doctrine
Ralph Nader
Readers Think, Thinkers Read
Julia Morris
The Mythologies of the Nauruan Refugee Nation
George Wuerthner
Caving to Ranchers: the Misguided Decision to Kill the Profanity Wolf Pack
Ann Garrison
Unworthy Victims: Houthis and Hutus
Julian Vigo
Britain’s Slavery Legacy
John Stanton
Brzezinski Vision for a Power Sharing World Stymied by Ignorant Americans Leaders, Citizens
Philip Doe
Colorado: 300 Days of Sunshine Annually, Yet There’s No Sunny Side of the Street
Joseph White
Homage to EP Thompson
Dan Bacher
The Big Corporate Money Behind Jerry Brown
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
DNC Playing Dirty Tricks on WikiLeaks
Ron Jacobs
Education for Liberation
Jim Smith
Socialism Revived: In Spite of Bernie, Donald and Hillary
David Macaray
Organized Labor’s Inferiority Complex
David Cortright
Alternatives to Military Intervention in Syria
Binoy Kampmark
The Terrors of Free Speech: Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act
Cesar Chelala
Guantánamo’s Quagmire
Nyla Ali Khan
Hoping Against Hope in Kashmir
William Hughes
From Sam Spade to the Red Scare: Dashiell Hammett’s War Against Rightwing Creeps
Raouf Halaby
Dear Barack Obama, Please Keep it at 3 for 3
Charles R. Larson
Review: Paulina Chiziane’s “The First Wife: a Tale of Polygamy”
David Yearsley
The Widow Bach: Anna Magdalena Rediscovered
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail