Obama dreams big
In praise of the President's bold, humane move to halt deportations of young undocumented immigrants
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Saturday, June 16, 2012
President Obama has made the American Dream come true for up to 800,000 young immigrants who were brought into the United States illegally by their parents. The heartiest of hails to the chief.
By the most humane order of his presidency, Obama boldly lifted the fear of deportation from the shoulders of thousands of New Yorkers who have been woven into the city’s fabric.
Many a fine family will long warmly remember this day.
The President’s directive implemented on his own authority many terms of the Dream Act, long-stalled legislation aimed at giving people brought to the United States as children — yet who remain “illegal” despite going to college or serving in the military — the right to stay.
Covered by the order are once-upon-a-time foreigners who arrived in the country before age 16, are no older than 30, have lived here at least five years, have no criminal record, and are currently in school, have earned a high school diploma or have served their country.
In other words: They have done nothing wrong. They have done many things right. They have simply lived, worked and contributed to America, and hope to continue.
The Dream Act began as a bipartisan bill. It died in 2010 when Republicans withdrew support
as the GOP shifted to obstructionism on all things immigration-related, except deportations.
Even as the Obama administration built on Bush administration actions by stepping up border enforcement and escalating deportations to record levels — 400,000 a year —
anti-immigration forces have refused to ease admissions.
Nor has Congress taken even the most tentative step toward the broader immigration reform that was a top domestic priority of former President George W. Bush.
Among the more reasonable Republican reactions to Obama’s move were Sen. Marco Rubio and Mitt Romney — both of whom gently praised the President’s goals but expressed concern about whether it was wise for Obama to act without Congress, which they said would set back the bigger goal of immigration reform.
If it is within Obama’s authority to detain and deport thousands while many others stay and live in freedom, it is within his authority to grant a reprieve.
As Daily News immigration expert Allan Wernick argued on these pages last Sunday, “Immigration enforcement is squarely in the hands of the executive branch” — citing a 1990 move by President George H.W. Bush to stop sending home Chinese nationals after the Tiananmen Square crackdown.
In the moral balance, this question could not be more clear.
Should we send “home” Daniela Pelaez, who graduated this year from North Miami Senior High school — as its valedictorian — only to be handed orders to go home, along with her sister, to Colombia? (After a huge public uproar, they were given a reprieve.)
Should we send “home” Stony Brook student and Woodside resident Nadia Habib, who late last year was told to pack her bags and prepare to move to Bangladesh
, a country she left at 20 months old? (After a huge public uproar, she was given a reprieve.)
Should we send “home” Maria Praeli, a 19-year-old high school senior and aspiring social worker from New Milford, Conn., who told the New York Times that upon hearing the news, “I can finally drive and not have to worry about the police”?
Obama did what decency demanded.
No comments:
Post a Comment