Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Tsarnaev Family And Asylum Fraud

As more details come out, the fraudulent nature of the asylum application by Anzor Tsarnaeva, pere to Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaeva, becomes readily more apparent as information reaches the public sphere.  Though the fraud was readily apparent during the application process as well, but U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Asylum Office chose to ignore the obvious fraud.

ABC News April 21, 2013 by Kirit Ragia
Boston Marathon Bombing Suspects' Twisted Family History
The history of the two Boston bombing suspects' family is a twisted one, woven with the various conflicts that have afflicted their ethnic homeland...

The first hint at fraud follows immediately from the account:

The aunt said the parents would come back to Dagestan to visit from time to time, but the sons stayed in the United States...
Sitting at her kitchen table here, the suspects' aunt, Patemat Sulemanova, recounted from memory a complex family history involving a deportation by Soviet leader Josef Stalin, two Chechen wars, and a severe beating in the United States that ultimately brought the suspects' father back to this restive region in southern Russia.

Strange behavior for someone fleeing political persecution to return repeatedly to where he was the victim of persecution and then returns permanently.  So fearful of his life, but not fearful enough to return.

But back to the transnational history of the Tsarnaev family:

The father's side of the family is ethnic Chechen, but they were among the many Chechen families who were expelled from the region by Stalin in February 1944 when he considered Chechens to be disloyal during World War II. They resettled in Kyrgyzstan, which then was part of the Soviet Union. It was there that the suspects' father, Anzor Tsarnaev, was born and raised.
He served his mandatory military term in the early 1980s in Novosibirsk, where he met his wife, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva. Her family was from Dagestan but she was in Novosibirsk to visit a relative.
The two married and eventually returned to live in Kyrgyzstan. They had four children, two girls and two boys, the two suspects. The elder son Tamerlan was born in the region of Kalmykia and the younger son Dzhokhar was born in Kyrgyzstan.

What we learn from this is that Tsarnaev pere was both a Kirghiz citizen and Russian citizen by birth.  Essentially he could live in two different nations as he willed.  And Dzhokhar was a Kirghiz by birth as well, after the breakup of the Soviet Union.  It is apparent that he also held passports from both Russia and Kyrgyzstan, an independent country, though Russian extends Russian citizenship to those born before the fall and those who are descendants of such.   In any event, any persecution problems in Russia could have been alleviated by moving to Kyrgyzstan.

But things get more complicated, as the Tsarnaev family settle in a constituent republic of the Russian Federation, Chechnya, that clearly made them Russian citizens as well.  Note that Tamerlan was born in a constituent republic of Russia, Kalmykia, and was consequently Russian by birth.

The young couple decided to leave Kyrgyzstan after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and attempted to settle in Chechnya, but bloody wars there in the 1990s forced them to quickly return to Kyrgyzstan.
By 2001, they moved to Dagestan, where the mother still had family, when the boys were 14 and 7 years old. They only lived there for about six months before obtaining refugee status and resettling in the United States.

So, six months in another constituent republic of Russia, Dagestan.  But they first return the Kyrgyzstan.  Clearly they had a legal right to be there, probably based on dual citizenship or rights to reside based on the former status of Kyrgyzstan as part of the Soviet Union.  So, the question is, what was the basis of Tsarnaev pere's asylum claim?  Other reports quoted him as saying that the Russians were after him.  Curious, as by that time the worst in Chechnya were over, but in any event he was a secular Muslim living in Kyrgyzstan, then Dagestan.  Not being a bearded one that the Russians were fighting in another constituent republic, why would the Russians single out an obscure non-threat?  Especially if the persecution he suffered was so minuscule that he returned repeatedly after moving to America.

We get a clue here:

NYT April 20, 2013 by Eric Schmitt, Michael S. Schmidt And Ellen Barry 
Bombing Inquiry Turns to Motive and Russian Trip
Anzor Tsarnaev and his younger son first came to the United States legally in April 2002 on 90-day tourist visas, federal law enforcement officials said. Once in this country, the father applied for political asylum, claiming he feared deadly persecution based on his ties to Chechnya. Dzhokhar, who was 8, applied for asylum under his father’s petition, the officials said.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev came to the United States later, and applied for American citizenship on Sept. 5 last year, federal law enforcement officials said.

So, he was so persecuted he entered the United States as a tourist, then, after admission, then went down to the USCIS Asylum Office to make a claim there.  Before leaving though, he would have had to go to the Russian government's passport office to get a passport, then go through the rather rigorous tourist visa application process at an American embassy or consulate in Russia.  The closest is Moscow, the very heart of the state apparatus that Tsarnaev feared so much.  This puts a lie to his persecution claim.  Even more telling is that he would have had to prove to the American embassy that he had what is so interestingly described as "an unrelinquished residence abroad."  In non-bureaucratese that means do you have the ties necessary to where you live, such as employment and family, ensuring that you will return from a temporary trip to the United States.  So, Tsarnaev pere would have had to show he was living quite well where he was, in Dagestan.  And he came with only one of four children and no wife.  Clearly leaving them there they were in no danger, which tells one that he was really in no danger as well.

An Asylum Officer should have picked up on these issues and denied the application for asylum application.  But this is quite telling on the credulity of the Asylum Officers and our asylum policy.  USCIS unhappily for many dead Americans, accepts any accretion of lies presented by aliens and follows a policy of "Get to Yes" rather than a "Get to the Truth."  A policy that has proven to be deadly to Americans.  And certainly not worth the cost in blood and gold.


Catch And Release Back With A Vengance

The discredited policy of "catch and release," the policy by which Department of Homeland Security agencies, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Victims Unit (ICE SVU), U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection Office of Field Operations (CBP OFO), apprehends illegal aliens, then releases them with no charges, is back with a vengeance.  Previously "catch and release" actually included filing charges with the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) with the aliens left to ignore their hearing date and disappear into the interior of the United States and was generally limited to BP arrests, but in a more limited manner, at least in the numbers of those caught and released, to ICE SVU's predecessor, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) Office of Investigations, as well as the legacy INS' Office of Inspections, predecessor to CBP OFO.  For the legacy Office of Inspections "catch and release" was generally limited to asylum applicants who arrive without documents at airports.  Over a period of time, large numbers of those with fraudulent asylum applications entered this way because the legacy INS did not take custody of arriving aliens seriously and was underfunded.  Usually the policy was limited to what the legacy agencies considered low threat aliens.  After the 1993 WTC bombing that was led by a asylum applicant who won the "catch and release" lottery, Ramzi Yousef, things were tightened up.  But not for long.

However, besides the return of "catch and release" for Mexican and other low threat illegals as part of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty, "catch and release" has returned for the new Ramzi Yousefs of the world.

New York Daily News April 21, 2013 by Iriving Dejohn , Joe Kemp and Rich Schapiro 
Friends Of Accused Boston Bomber Taken Into Custody In New Bedford, Mass.
Two foreign nationals — who are believed to be associates of the alleged Boston Marathon bombers — were arrested Saturday on immigration violations, authorities said.
The men, identified by neighbors as 19-year-olds from Kazakhstan, drove around in a black BMW with the mock license plate, “TERRORISTA #1.”
The pair was hauled out of their New Bedford apartment in handcuffs about 3:50 p.m. The raid was carried out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, a spokesman told the Daily News.
“These individuals were arrested on administrative immigration violations,” spokesman Ross Feinstein said in a terse statement...
The three were taken into custody Friday evening — but let go early Saturday.

There we have it, ICE SVU has applied "catch and release" to terrorism suspects.

And there is a twist, the FBI has since re-arrested the recipients of the Obama Regime "Catch and Release" Administrative Amnesty on the same day they were released by ICE SVU.

The Rockford Record April 21, 2013 by H. Michael Vincent
More Arrests In Boston Bombings, FBI Eyes Terror Cell 
Two men are in federal custody as the FBI investigates a possible terror cell that may be linked to suspected Boston Marathon bombers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.
The men, known only as Diaz and Azmat, were arrested Saturday, April 20, in New Bedford, Mass. While the suspects are being held on immigration violations, their arrest was made after police received new information regarding a possible 12-member terror cell operating in the area.
Investigators say the group’s main focus may have been training the brothers to build compact explosives like the bombs used in the marathon attack and those thrown at police officers Thursday night during a car chase.

Just as "catch and release" allow Ramzi Yousef to kill Americans, it is only a matter of time until "catch and release" kills more Americans.

Monday, April 22, 2013

War On Whites And The Second Amendment From The Treason Bar

The mask, for what it was, has slid off the face of the Treason Bar.  To these Alien Firsters, the Constitution, and especially the Second Amendment, stands in the way of their program of electing a new people, a new people hostile to the Second Amendment and to whites.

ILW.com April 22, 2013 by Roger Algase
Advocates of Hate Try to Use the Boston Bombing to Defeat Immigration Reform
And what is a shooting? Nothing to get excited about in America, evidently; we have dozens of them every day. No matter how many shootings by native-born Americans occur, America's right wing makes sure that nothing will be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally disturbed, as witnessed by the Senate vote against gun control last week which will truly live in infamy.

Of course, by shooting, he does not refer to the carnage in Chicago seen on a daily basis where blacks are shooting fellow blacks literally by the dozens.  But he does make it explicit that nothing less than Dianne Feinstein's gun ban will please him.  The only shootings he mentions are those by a few whites who actually meet the legal definition of insane, unlike the Tsarnaev brothers who were cynically waging religious war on America.

His solution though to foreign terrorists is amnesty for all illegals here.

But when mass murder or mayhem is carried out by anyone born outside of the US, then, the right wing has a different reaction - either make the immigration laws tougher, or block any attempt to make them more humane and realistic. In other words, as ID's April 19 editorial pointed out, the strategy is to make a million, or many millions, of innocent people pay the price for the actions of one, or a very few, people with whom they have no connection whatsoever.

And any resistance is racism.

This is another form of hate. It is non-violent and legal, to be sure. It is also protected by the first amendment. But attempts to use the Boston Marathon bombing, whatever the motives on the part of two obviously severely disturbed young foreign-born men, both of whom were in the US legally and one of whom is an American citizen, may have been, as an excuse to scuttle immigration reform are nothing short of despicable.

Notice how the foreign terrorists, acting in the name of a religious war on most Americans, are just "disturbed,"  while those who react to their terrorism are racists.  We know where the Treason Bar sympathies are.  With the victims not of terror, but of "racism."  Not that illegal aliens were forced to come here.

And the War on Whites has been declared by Treason Bar:  

ILW.com April 19, 2013
Apr 19 - Terrorist Enablers On The Right
Speaking on Sean Hannity this morning, former Republican Presidential candidate Pat Buchanan said about the undocumented "they ought to be in the shadows". This was in connection with the Boston bombings by a deranged duo, providing some on the right an excuse to prevent comprehensive immigration reform, and to continue to keep America unsafe by ensuring that the "shadows" in America are sufficiently large to hide any number of terrorists. These lunatics of the right (fortunately not joined by the lunatics of the left) want to use the fact that in any group of a million people there will inevitably be one who is a really bad person, and thus want to throw all the babies out with the bath water.

Except that the the Tsarnaev brothers were not one out of a million, but two out of 200.  Much more dangerous odds for innocent Americans.  Nor was it the right that brought them here.  It was the Treason Bar that asylum for Muslim terrorists.  Not just the Tsarnaev brothers, but Waad Ramadan Alwan Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, Ramzi UsefBasaaly Saeed Moalin, Issa Doreh, Mohamed Mohamed Mohamud, Ahmed Nasiri Taalil Mohamud, and Mohamed Osman Mohamud, to name a few asylum terrorists.

Does this mean now that we can deport everyone who lives in Corinth, Mississippi just because one crazy guy there sent ricin-laced letters in an attempt to kill a US Senator, a federal judge and the President? Sen. Grassley (R-IA), ranking member on the Senate Judiciary committee made this comment at the opening hearing for immigration reform: "We also appreciate the opportunity to talk about immigration. Particularly in light of all that's happening in Massachusetts right now and over the last week".

So, the solution of the Treason Bar is to deport native born Americans for the crime of one lunatic?  Deport Americans?  The same people who do not want illegal aliens deported?  It shows the contempt the Treason Bar has for the Constitution and what they want to do with those who own firearms and whom they consider to be "racists."  It is the Treason Bar that is waging war on Americans.

Unless they offer specific proposals designed to remove lunatics from Corinth, Mississippi along with lunatics among Chechen immigrants, their ploy is clear - just a fig leaf to hold up CIR which they oppose on other grounds. If the time has come to play the racist card, then it must be played. Some in the right are fighting dirty - and are not engaging CIR on the substance. The proponents of CIR must loudly point out the open racism of the opponents (Pat Buchanan is an open racist) - a defensive attitude will defuse all the momentum thus far built up for CIR.

The Treason Bar policy then is that there are terrorists from America, so we should do nothing to keep out or remove foreign terrorists unless we are willing to remove the terrorists from Corinth.  Nothing mentioned that domestic terrorists are routinely arrested and imprisoned.  Some like Tim McVeigh, are executed.  No alien terrorists have been executed yet, not the 1993 WTC terrorists, not Nidal Hasan, not one involved in 9/11, not one Muslim terrorist has been executed.  Only one white guy.  So the U.S. is "doing" something about domestic terrorists.  So, just what is the motivation for the ethnic cleansing of Corinth?  To satisfy the crazed Treason Bar.  The Treason Bar wants to do to their fellow Americans what the world accused Slobodan Milošević of doing to the Kosovars.

The big lie though is that amnesty will solve the foreign terrorist problem, amnesty will make us safer, but the fact that legal status did not stop the Boston terrorists.  It enabled them.  Without an insane asylum system, this bombing would not have happened.  The Treason Bar knows this, but it is waging jihad on white Americans and on the Second Amendment.

Friday, April 19, 2013

Pot And Rap

Fox News tonight reported that one or more of the Muslim terrorists who bombed the Boston Marathon were well known among their peers for smoking pot and listening to rap.  And people think that pot and rap are part of acculturation to America?

No, rap music is anti-American and anti-white.  It is openly racist.  A Muslim immigrant who listens to rap is acculturating to an anti-American, an anti-white sub-culture.  It is also of note that Barak Hussein Obama is a big fan of rap and smoked a lot of pot while younger.  I don't think this is coincidental.

Another Warning To The Gun Crowd

The Treason Bar hates you.  They hate the Second Amendment.  And they want more Demoncrat immigrant voters to finish you off.

ILW.com April 18, 2013 by Roger Algase
The Senate Disgraces America on Guns. Will it Do the Same on Immigration Reform?
I quote from an April 18 Politico Article: Gang of Eight aims to stop conservative attacks:
"Democrats watched President Obama's efforts to pass gun restrictions fail in the Senate and said it might foreshadow what will happen on immigration reform.
'It's like guns', Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) said. Everyone thought everything looks wonderful, but this is a long way to go yet.'"
No further comment is required. CIR supporters will need to keep their powder dry.

Loose the upcoming immigration battle and your 2nd Amendment rights will follow.

Follow Me On Twitter


More Evidence of Asylum/Refugee Fraud

Mark Stein on the Rush Limbaugh Show reports that the father of the two terrorists lives still in Russia despite gaining asylum/refugee status.

Confirmed by the press:

KTTV Los Angeles/AP
Boston Terror Suspect's Father: He's A 'True Angel'
MAKHACHKALA, Russia (AP) -- In an anguished interview, the father of the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing described his fugitive son as a smart and accomplished "angel."

Anzor Tsarnaev spoke with The Associated Press by telephone from the southern Russian republic of Dagestan after police said one of his sons, 26-year-old Tamerlan, had been killed in a shootout and the other, Dzhokhar, was being intensely pursued.

"My son is a true angel," the elder Tsarnaev said. He said his son was "an intelligent boy" who was studying medicine.

"We expected him to come on holidays here," he said.

"They were set up, they were set up!" he exclaimed. "I saw it on television; they killed my older son Tamerlan."

The importance here is that most who receive refugee or asylum lie about the basis of their asylum/refugee claim.  Supposedly asylees and refugees claim that they cannot remain in their home country because of persecution.  However, most claims are fraudulent as proved by Anzor Tsarnaev, who despite receiving probable refugee status, returned to live where he was supposedly oppressed.  

Asylum and refugee status were created for when you risked your life escaping from behind the Iron Curtain.  However, most refugees and asylees travel the world freely and are not restricted from leaving.  Only North Korea does it the old Soviet style.  Even Red China allows its people to travel freely.  Thousands of Chinese travel to the United States and return.  Something that would not have happened with Russians during the Cold War.  However China, Mexico, and Brazil supply refugees and asylees.  Not based on adherence to democracy and free enterprise, but based on one-child policy,  fear of crime, and homosexuality.  Hardly what Congress was thinking when they wrote the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Asylum and refugee status is a scam.  Just ask ask the Somali terrorists who came here on refugee/asylum status.

Muslim Immigrant Terrorists Here On Asylum?

Information is not in on how the Muslim immigrant terrorists who struck at the Boston Marathon immigrated to the United States, but it is reported that they are legal permanent residents, e.g. green card holders.

It is also reported that they are Chechen or Kirghizian.  Given that, it is highly likely that these terrorists, who apparently are highly motivated America hating Islamists, came here via asylum.  Muslim fanatics who are fighting their less fanatic Muslim countrymen and attacking Christian Russians as well, from the Chechnya area are generally admitted on the basis of refugee status or asylum status.

Contrary to popular opinion, there is no significant screening of any immigrant group, including asylees and refugees.  There is a fingerprint check and a name check, and that is it.  There is no investigation into the beliefs of the applicant for immigration status, even when they come from terrorist source states.  It is no surprise then that we admit tens of thousands of Islamist fanatics from Palestine, Somalia, and Chechnya.  And consequently no surprise that there is blow back when we admit individuals who no surprisingly turn out to be terrorists.

Asylum fraud is something that this blog and another blog, Refugee Resettlement Watch, have warned about.  It appears that we are Cassandras, ignored by Marco Rubio.


Refugee Resettlement Watch and Politico report that the two terrorists were refugees.


Uncle of the terrorists confirms that the terrorists got "asylum."  Around 2000?  Thanks Jorge Bush.

Thursday, April 18, 2013

Rubio RINO Amnesty To Aid Asylum Fraud

The Rubio RINO Amnesty has many surprises tucked away.  Whether it is for Facebook or criminals, there is much that Marco Rubio needs to hide and he did not do a very good job with the softball questions today on Rush.  

Asylum fraud is one of the little surprises stored away.  The Treason Bar was able to sneak changes into the Rubio RINO Amnesty that would further enable asylum fraud.

WaPo April 17, 2013 by Suzi Khimm
Inside The Immigration Bill: A Reprieve For Asylum-Seekers
A bipartisan Senate group has agreed on a sweeping legislative proposal that would represent the most ambitious overhaul of the U.S. immigration system in three decades. The Washington Post will be examining portions of the bill on Post Politics in a series of blog entries.
Right now, those who come to the United States seeking asylum face a one-year deadline to apply for a visa. Under the Senate Gang of Eight’s bill, that deadline would be completely lifted — a change that immigration and human-rights advocates are celebrating. 

OK, another problem with the immigration issue, even a reporter assigned to cover immigration issues, is that those reporters don't know the slightest bit about immigration law.  Suzy Khimm is no different.  No surprises since she previously wrote for a communist rag, but that she is from Cambodia tells much given the average IQ there.

First rule of asylum law.  There is no such thing as a visa for asylum.  There are non-immigrant visas and there are immigrant visas.  But there is no asylum visa.  And there certainly are no visas issued to aliens who apply for benefits in the United States, especially not asylum applicants.  Asylum applicants, e.g. those who meet the statutory definition of a refugee but are physically present in the United States, apply directly with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for status as an aslyee.  They are not granted a visa.  If asylum is granted, after one year they may apply for legal permanent residence.  However, at no time do asylees ever have a visa.

Now, back to the story.

The deadline was originally imposed to prevent fraud, but advocates have long complained that it shuts many legitimate asylum-seekers out of the system. “People who are fleeing for their lives are not necessarily thinking what legal avenue you take or box you check,” said Greg Chen, advocacy director for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. 

Fraud in asylum cases has been an overwhelming problem.  Whether it is Somali terrorists, MS-13 gangbangers, or Mexican cops, asylum is usually the first and last resort of an alien with no option to be legally present in the United States.

Previously asylum was for those seeking to flee totalitarian states.  The image from the Cold War was those clambering over the Berlin Wall or jumping ship from from East Bloc vessel in a western port.  In fact the current definition in law was enacted when Jimmy Carter returned two Russian sailors to their vessel and to certain death in the gulag.  But the result has been kritarchs and bureaucrats defining asylum down.  Down to Mexican cops who are afraid to do their job, Brazilian homosexuals, lesbians, and transsexuals, or gangbangers who claim they aren't in anymore.

Even so, the year deadline for application is also routinely ignored not only by the immigration courts but also by the USCIS Asylum Office.  USCIS will accept any excuse for failure to file within a year of arrival to the United States.  All the applicant has to do is say they did not know about asylum, did not know there was a deadline, or were too afraid to deal with American government officials.  It is all lies.  Everyone who comes here to live knows what they need to do.  They don't spend thousands of dollars on smugglers or go through the visitor visa process and not know about the asylum process.  Well, some don't, but they are well instructed by the Treason Bar after they are arrested and placed in deportation proceedings.  Most asylum claims come years after entry and, more importantly, after they are arrested and set up for deportation.  Well, at least when the government was actually deporting aliens.  Not so much anymore, except for criminal aliens who claim gang membership or former membership as the basis for asylum.  Or even if a gangbanger asked you out on a date.  

But the Treason Bar does not want any interference in their asylum scam, like too much debt.  So the one year deadline will be ended at their instance.

Of course, that is not all they demand.  To fill their coffers the Treason Bar also included language that made all stateless persons eligible for asylum, prohibited "adversarial" interviews by officers investigating asylum fraud, and granted Barak Hussien Obama the authority to designate any group of persons asylum status.  It also curtailed the standards for refusing asylum, ending the prohibition on asylum for terrorists.  Now only persecutors on the basis of race, religion, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion can be prohibited from entering under the special Presidential designation of particular groups.  So, anything else goes for the "special" refugees, including terrorism.

ICE Works To Protect Illegal Alien Union Thugs

In an unprecedented move, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) moved to suspend immigration enforcement at a company employing illegal aliens so as to protect a unionization campaign.  ICE's toothless audits are notorious for allowing illegal aliens to remain in the United States, moving from ruthless employer to ruthless employer, never to be deported and always driving down wages for Americans.  ICE took this incident one step further, it suspended an ongoing enforcement action to allow the illegal aliens to vote in a union organization election. Effectively it conspired with unions to violate U.S. immigration law.

NYT July 27, 2012 by Stephen Greenhouse

MILWAUKEE — On May 27, about 150 workers from Palermo’s Pizza factory here, representing three-fourths of its production workers, met to sign a petition saying they wanted to unionize. They say they gave the petition to management two days later.

Around the same time, Palermo’s delivered letters to 89 immigrant workers, asking them to provide documentation verifying that they had the right to work in the United States. Ten days later, almost all of them were fired.

Labor organizers assert that Palermo’s, one of the nation’s largest producers of frozen pizza, was trying to snuff out a unionization drive in its infancy. The company says it was merely responding to warnings it had received from federal immigration authorities to fire unauthorized workers or face hefty fines.
Then ICE decided that it would act to protect aliens who are in the United States illegally as well as working illegally.

After several labor leaders complained that the enforcement action at Palermo’s was undermining a unionization effort, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced on June 7 that it was staying the enforcement, the first time it has ever suspended a crackdown that way, according to immigration experts. Although the agency’s move might have been too late to help the fired Palermo’s workers, labor experts say the government’s change of heart might affect future efforts to unionize immigrants.
And it all had roots in an earlier agreement between ICE and the Department of Labor (DOL).

Ana Avendano, the A.F.L.-C.I.O.’s director of immigration affairs, said ICE’s suspension of its enforcement action was the first time it had made such a move. She said it was consistent with a December 2011 agreement that ICE signed with the Department of Labor, promising to refrain from work site enforcement that interfered with labor disputes or wage investigations.
This blog did not pay attention to the agreement signed in December 2011 and consequently overlooked the quite explicit nature of ICE's intent to support illegal aliens in their unionization efforts.  From the Memorandum of Understanding between DOL and ICE:

ICE and the principal DOL components agree to the following commitments and exchanges in order to ensure coordination and deconfliction of their respective civil enforcement activities.

A. Except as noted in paragraph C, ICE agrees to refrain from engaging in civil worksite enforcement activities at a worksite that is the subject of an existing DOL investigation of a labor dispute during the pendency of the DOL investigation and any related proceeding. ICE will continue its existing practice of assessing whether tips and leads it receives concerning worksite enforcement involve a worksite with a pending labor dispute. DOL agrees to assist ICE's efforts under this paragraph by providing ICE with timely and accurate information to allow for identification of overlapping enforcement activity.

B. ICE further agrees to be alert to and thwart attempts by other parties to manipulate its worksite enforcement activit ies for illicit or improper purposes. ICE will continue its existing practice of assessing whether tips and leads it receives concerning worksite enforcement are motivated by an improper desire to manipulate a pending labor dispute, retaliate against employees for exercising labor rights, or otherwise frustrate the enforcement of labor laws. DOL agrees to assist ICE's efforts under this paragraph by informing ICE of information DOL may have that other parties seek to manipulate a pending labor dispute, retaliate against employees for exercising labor rights, or otherwise frustrate the enforcement of labor laws.

Apologies to my readers for overlooking this signifcant step in the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty.  But this step by ICE would shock the writer if it was not just more lawlessness by the developing dictatorship.  Note that the MOU speaks of deconfliction of ICE and DOL investigations as the purpose of the document.  But there is no evidence of an ongoing DOL investigation in the NYT article.  Consequently it appears that ICE has expanded the definition of "investigation" to include union organization activities.  Which becomes more specific later in the MOU:

C. Notwithstanding paragraph A, ICE may engage in worksite enforcement activities at a worksite that is the subject of a pending labor dispute if-
Whereupon we find the real reason for the agreement is not coordination and deconfliction, but protection to illegal alien union thugs.

Further on in the MOU, ICE and DOL provide further evidence that coordination and deconfliction is not the purpose, but the end of joint DOL and ICE investigations.

E. Unless specifically agreed to by both DOL and ICE, ICE and the DOL components covered by this MOU will not conduct joint or coordinated civil enforcement activities at a worksite.
And ICE will provide amnesty to specific illegal aliens who get a DOL "sponsorship."

F. ICE agrees to consider DOL requests that ICE grant a temporary law enforcement parole or deferred action to any witness needed for a DOL investigation of a labor dispute during the pendency of the DOL investigation and any related proceeding where such witness is in the country unlawfully.
Just as the Regime opposed 287(g) coordination with local law enforcement to increase immigration enforcement, so it sought to sever ICE and DOL cooperation that threatened illegal aliens.

Clearly the Regime is signalling to unions that organizing illegal aliens will be openly tolerated, despite the fact that unions are not exempt from Title 8 of the United States Code Section 1324 that prohibits bringing and harboring illegal aliens.

Lies, Damn Lies, And Statistics

Yeah, one has heard that before, but when the shoe fits, wear it.  And we are back again with the Big Lie of the Obama Regime and its ongoing Administrative Amnesty.  The Big Lie, there is a record number of deportations all thanks to the tough enforcement activity of Barak Hussein Obama.  Of course that is a lie.  There is only a record number of deportations if you count illegal aliens arrested at entry by the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) and turned over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Enforcement and Removal Operations (ICE ERO) which is separate and distinct from ICE SVU, formally known as ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), a misnomer if there ever was one for sex crimes are their forte not immigration law enforcement, for return to Mexico.  These 73,000 or so illegal aliens who would normally be returned by USBP and counted as USBP statistics were instead counted as formal removals (deportations) as to boost up ICE ERO numbers.  All intended to deceive the public into thinking that the Regime was serious about immigration enforcement so as to justify the ongoing Administrative Amnesty.

Here is the Big Lie:

NYT September 7, 2012 by Julia Preston
Record Number Of Foreigners Were Deported In 2011, Officials Say
Immigration enforcement authorities detained and deported record numbers of illegal immigrants in 2011 and are on track for similar figures this year, even as the numbers of migrants crossing the border illegally dropped to a 40-year low, according to data published Friday by the Department of Homeland Security.
Immigration agents deported 391,953 foreign-born people during the 2011 fiscal year, the department’s Office of Immigration Statistics reported. They included more than 188,000 people who had been convicted of crimes in the United States — an “all-time high” for such deportations, the report found.

Where the press babe blindly repeating Janet Reno Napolitano press releases gets these numbers is unknown, because the underlying statistics as reported by ICE show only 366,292 total removals for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, one month shy of the end of the Fiscal Year on September 30, 2012.   And since FY August 2012 total removals are only 23,304, there is no way that ICE ERO will make a total removals of 391,292 for the FY 2012.  In fact, FY August 2012 removals are a precipitous decline from the rest of the FY 2012 months which were all over 30,000 removals per month with FY July 2012 being 32,742. And subtract the 63,728 deportees borrowed from USBP returns and there is nothing to brag about.

It is clear that ICE ERO is more concerned about not arresting illegal aliens and spending man-hours and other resources not arresting and removing aliens, such as the Charlotte 10.

The press babe from the NYT did also link to some other interesting statistics.  Of special note is the continuing decline of ICE SVU arrests of illegal aliens, which basically means a continuing decline in work-site enforcement:

FY 2011: 16,296

FY 2010: 18,312

FY 2009: 21,280

A decline in ICE SVU arrests by about 5,000.  Which in itself is part of the Regime's Administrative Amnesty, allowing illegal aliens to remain in the United States even after they are discovered by ICE SVU's audit program directed against employers that have illegal alien labor as part of their business plan.

Of even greater interest is the nature of those arrested and deported.  The radical left is waging a war on immigration enforcement, claiming any enforcement is either racial profiling or will lead to racial profiling.  However arrest statistics show that racial profiling works:

Nation of Origin                                                          FY2011  %     FY2010    %   FY2009    %

Mexico  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489,547  76.3   598,004  79.5  715,914  82.3
Guatemala  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,153    6.1    36,230     4.8    33,882    3.9
Honduras. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,122     4.5     29,942    4.0    31,822    3.7
El Salvador  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,594    4.0     27,539     3.7   26,778    3.1
Cuba  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,691      0.7    3,947       0.5    4,701     0.5
Dominican Republic  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,405      0.7    5,241       0.7    5,129     0.6

In fact no non-white country shows up on the top 15 source nations of immigration arrests.  People of color are the illegal alien population. If ICE ERO and ICE SVU just started going to areas of high illegal alien concentration, East Los Angeles, NYC, Boston, Parkland Hospital in Dallas, etc. and stopped every person who looked Hispanic, immigration enforcement would be so easy.  And you could easily get to 1 million deportations.  Why, because it is a crime that non-whites commit overwhelmingly, basically 99.9% of immigration law violators are people of the non-white color.

That is some statistics that don't lie.

Why The Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty Is Unconstitutional

A reader, or may it be said, a writer of a letter submitted  to VDare, John E. Jones,they are not always the same, claimed that the ongoing Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty was completely legal based on various provisions of the law that provide for "discretion" by the executive branch as well as an interesting claim that immigration actions are beyond judicial review.

Today's Letter VDare October 27, 2012
A Bay Area Reader Asks Why, Specifically, Is Obama’s Administrative Amnesty Unconstitutional?
Calling President Obama's deferrals unconstitutional misinforms the reader. 
The immigration statutes are larded with provisions granting discretion to the Attorney General; the two year DREAM act deferrals are an administrative exercise of discretion authorized by existing law, especially given the well established principle that the executive, in immigration matters, exercises authority akin to the foreign affairs power, an area almost immune to judicial review. 


While bandying about the charge of unconstitutionality may avoid the need to tell the reader all this, one would hope VDare.com readers would receive better.

Well, challenge accepted.

First, let's define the issue.  This blog has been at the forefront on identifying the ongoing Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty, which is not restricted to the most flagrant abuse of the Constitution, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) amnesty, but the ongoing non-feasance by U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement.

But for the record and from what John E. Jones, if that is your real name, appears to refer to is DACA.  But as with most who know nothing of immigration law Jones' missive has a kernel of truth.  Congress, note that, Congress granted the Attorney General and subsequently the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security the authority to parole aliens into the United States in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).  This is significant in that the INA is just that, an Act of Congress.  Contrary to Jones's claim, the Executive Branch does not hold any independent authority regarding immigration and naturalization, as with naturalization, it is Congress that is granted the authority to create a uniform standard for naturalization and subsequently that authority has also been exercised with regard to immigration as well.

Now in one area, the Executive has been delegated significant authority, the power to parole into the United States aliens otherwise not authorized to enter the United States and prohibited to do so by the INA.  Congress prohibited entry into the United States many different categories of aliens in Section 212(a) of the Act, and in Section 212(d)(5)(A) it granted the Executive parole authority:

The Attorney General may, except as provided in subparagraph (B) or in section 214(f) , in his discretion parole into the United States temporarily under such conditions as he may prescribe only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit any alien applying for admission to the United States, but such parole of such alien shall not be regarded as an admission of the alien and when the purposes of such parole shall, in the opinion of the Attorney General, have been served the alien shall forthwith return or be returned to the custody from which he was paroled and thereafter his case shall continue to be dealt with in the same manner as that of any other applicant for admission to the United States. 

Note that the authority is first granted to the Attorney General by an Act of Congress, not some inherent authority, and is limited to a "case-by-case basis," not to whole classes of aliens, such as childhood arrivals, and has an "urgent humanitarian" or "significant public benefit requirement" which is limited to those aliens applying for admission, not those present in the United States.

Also note that aliens may only remain "temporarily" and should be returned to custody and be treated as any other arriving alien.

In no cases do DACA aliens qualify for parole, and the Regime has even admitted this fact, they remain illegal aliens, as opposed to paroles, who have a legal status.  The Regime though has granted these illegal aliens without legal status employment authorization without Congressional authority.  Congress though is the branch of government that authorizes alien employment.  That authority is from Article I of the Constitution, not Article II of the Constitution.

Furthermore it is clear that the DACA amnesty recipients are not temporary or limited, nor are they going to be returned and treated at any time as any other arriving alien without a visa permitting them to apply for admission like any other alien.  They are here to stay as Barak Hussein Obama has said.

While this really has nothing to do with the myth of judicial review that Jones cites as some how some way restricting the Executive in other areas, but not in immigration and foreign affairs; however the restrictions on the Executive's authority in the area of immigration are quite clear in Article I of the Constitution; the uniform standard for naturalization and the general legislative authority, the necessary and proper clause:

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

There is nothing to do with immigration anywhere in Article II.  Receiving foreign ministers and executing a foreign policy have nothing to do with aliens entering and remaining in the United States.  Laws necessary and proper for regulating aliens remain in Article I of the Constitution.

In fact the Executive recognizes that parole authority is limited; here is what U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) says about the parole authority:

The legal foundation for humanitarian parole comes from the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Section 212(d)(5)(A) of the INA states that USCIS has discretion to parole an individual into the United States temporarily under certain conditions for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit on a case-by-case basis.

One can see that it is limited and restricted to individual cases, not whole classes of aliens.  But in any event, remember, DACA does not parole aliens, it just grants them a benefit, employment authorization, not authorized by Congress.

Of course the other aspect of the ongoing Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty is the ongoing non-feasance by the Executive in the enforcement of immigration laws.  It should be pointed out to Mr. Jones, if that is his real name, that the President takes an Oath of Office to see that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

and from Article II:

"...he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed..."

Quite clear. No room for discretion here, as least not any discretion authorized by Article I of the Constitution.  Barak Hussein Obama took an oath to uphold and execute the laws of the United States, but instead he was unlawfully and in violation of the Constitution granting benefits to aliens without authorization in the law, and in fact in contravention of various laws of the United States.

ICE SVU Ends Immigration Enforcement

After recently formally announcing a policy that has been in effect for four years, that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will not investigate, detain, arrest, or deport illegal aliens detained by local law enforcement agencies or otherwise brought to ICE's attention, ICE also let it be known that it has decided to end other immigration law enforcement action, such as the investigation of immigration fraud.  Instead of enforcing immigration law, ICE has decided that it will be the lead agency investigating child pornography.

HuffPo January 3, 2013 by Alicia Caldwell 
Child Porn Investigation Nets 200 Suspected Sex Offenders
WASHINGTON -- More than 200 adults have been arrested in an international investigation of child pornography, Immigration and Customs Enforcement said Thursday.
The agency's director, John Morton, said 123 child victims were identified during the five-week investigation, which ended in early December. ICE and local authorities found 110 victims in 19 U.S. states, while the others were living in six countries elsewhere.
Morton declined to provide specific details about which foreign countries were involved, saying only that there were some cases in Mexico.
The investigation, dubbed "Operation Sunflower," was part of ICE's effort to find and rescue victims, and arrest abusers and people who make or transmit child pornography.
"We have to attack child exploitation relentlessly and together. There is no other way, there is no other answer," Morton said. "It is a wrong among wrongs. We are literally defending the defenseless."
For an agency charged with immigration and customs violations, it is remarkably far afield from its enforcement mission.
Alot of Americans were arrested, but no customs or immigration violations were found.  This is in direct conflict with its immigration and customs enforcement mission and raison d'etre.  And in conflict as well with ICE's claim that it does not have the resources to arrest and deport aliens arrested by local law enforcement agencies.
But it does complement another expansion of the illegal and unconstitutional amnesty that the Obama Regime is pressing.  In another act of defiance in the face of statutes, the Regime has decided that illegal aliens sponsored by U.S. citizens for legal permanent residency will no longer have to obtain waivers of grounds of inadmissibility during consular processing of immigrant visas outside the United States.  Instead the illegal aliens can apply for waivers of the inadmissibility while in the United States, avoiding the chance of a failure of the application while outside the United States and the legislatively mandated 3 and 10 year bars for those who have been in the United States illegally.  The 3 and 10 year bars were intended to discourage illegal immigration.  However the Regime wants to encourage illegal immigration.
WaPo January 3, 2012 by David Nakamura and Tara Bahrampour
White House PushesForward On Immigration Ahead Of Bigger Reform Fight
The Obama administration’s decision this week to ease visa requirements for hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants represents its latest move to reshape immigration through executive action, even as the White House gears up for an uncertain political fight over a far-more-sweeping legislative package in the months ahead.
Immigration advocates on Thursday hailed a rule change at the Department of Homeland Security that would make it easier for many undocumented immigrants to stay in the United States as they seek permanent residency, saying it will improve the lives of relatives who could have been separated for years without the changes.

Interestingly enough, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) which is administering this part of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty, admits that the current rule that requires the illegal alien to apply at a U.S. consulate overseas before that illegal alien can apply for a waiver of the 3 and 10 year bar, is in fact a law, not a rule or regulation, therefore Constitutionally beyond the authority of the Regime or USCIS to change:

Secretary Napolitano Announces Final Rule to Support Family Unity During Waiver Process
Under current law, immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who are not eligible to adjust status in the United States to become lawful permanent residents must leave the U.S. and obtain an immigrant visa abroad. Individuals who have accrued more than six months of unlawful presence while in the United States must obtain a waiver to overcome the unlawful presence inadmissibility bar before they can return to the United States after departing to obtain an immigrant visa. Under the existing waiver process, which remains available to those who do not qualify for the new process, immediate relatives cannot file a waiver application until after they have appeared for an immigrant visa interview abroad and the Department of State has determined that they are inadmissible.

Of more import though is that in and of itself the domestic processing of the waiver should not be of import.  The waiver requires that the American citizen applying for a waiver for the alien prove that the American citizen will experience extreme hardship without the presence of the illegal alien in question.

In order to obtain a provisional unlawful presence waiver, the applicant must be an immediate relative of a U.S. citizen, inadmissible only on account of unlawful presence, and demonstrate the denial of the waiver would result in extreme hardship to his or her U.S. citizen spouse or parent.

Going back to the WaPo story, we get only one example, a State of California law enforcement officer who is married to an illegal alien from El Salvador.

Michelle Escobar, 38, a U.S. citizen who lives in Laurel, said her husband, German, 33, plans to apply for a waiver under the new rule. Until now, she said, he had been afraid to go to his native El Salvador to apply.
“He would be barred for 10 years, probably,” said Escobar, a state investigator. “That’s why we’ve been so scared to put in for it.” 

According to the law, she could not meet the level of extreme hardship.  She is obviously the main bread winner in the household.  Investigators in various State of California law enforcement and regulator agencies are highly paid, with those with over 10 years seniority earning over $6,000 a month, plus benefits and an retirement system where they retire at 100% of their base pay.  So just how is Michelle Escobar going to prove extreme hardship?  She can't. 

And therein lies the problem, or how this other aspect of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty will operate.  The so-called provisional waivers will be nothing more than a paperwork exercise, with adjudicating officers ordered to approve any and all applications regardless of the legal standard for "extreme hardship."

Here is the standard as accurately described by a member of the Treason Bar:

The Law Offices of Jonathan C. Capp
In these cases an applicant for an immigrant or K visa is required to submit an extreme hardship or I-601 waiver, so called as the form to be submitted is form I-601.
The waiver application has to be extremely well documented to have a good chance of success
Approval of such application requires a finding that the refusal of admission to the United States of such immigrant alien would result in extreme hardship to the United States citizen or lawful permanent resident spouse or parent of the applicant  Approval also requires a favorable exercise of discretion from the Attorney General.  This requires a weighing of all factors, the favorable against the unfavorable, in each case.
All claims of hardship must be supported by documentary evidence or explanation specifying the hardship. Family separation and financial inconvenience, in and of themselves, do not necessarily constitute extreme hardship. Therefore, it is important for your spouse or parent to describe and document any other claim that might be a hardship. The above-requested information is necessary to render an equitable and fair decision on your Application for Waiver of Grounds of Excludability (I-601).
A waiver of section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act  is dependent first upon a showing that the bar imposes an extreme hardship on a qualifying family member. Congress provided this waiver but limited its application. By such limitation it is evident that it did not intend that a waiver be granted merely due to the fact that a qualifying relationship existed. The key term in the provision is "extreme" and thus only in cases of real actual or prospective injury to the United States national or lawful permanent resident will the bar be removed. Common results of the bar, such as separation, financial difficulties, etc., in themselves are insufficient to warrant approval of an application unless combined with much more extreme impacts. Matter of Ngai, 19 I & N Dec. 245. With this qualification in mind, furnish documentary evidence proving that failure to receive the waiver requested would result in extreme hardship to your US citizen spouse or parent.

So, coming soon, another aspect of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty, open and flagrant misconduct and malfeasance by USCIS and its officers.

DHS Announces That DREAMers Aren't Illegal Aliens

In a strange pronouncement, the Department of Homeland Security announced that illegal aliens who are benefiting from the DREAM Act Administrative Amnesty are no longer illegal aliens.  This is, besides being legally incorrect, also contradicted by the Regime's claim that for the purpose of Obamacare, DREAMers are illegal aliens.

KVOA Tucson January 21, 2013 by Sam Salzwedel
New Policy Could Help Undocumented Immigrants Get Licenses
TUCSON - An announcement from the Department of Homeland Security might make it more difficult for Arizona to deny drivers licenses from some undocumented immigrants.
Arizona is the only Mexican Border State not issuing licenses to immigrants who qualify for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival status, according to the National Immigration Law Center.
Deferred Action allows some young people who were brought to the US illegally to stay if they are in school or have finished high school.
Michigan, Iowa and Nebraska also do not grant drivers licenses while 31 others do, according to the NILC.
The DHS update says, "an individual whose case has been deferred is not considered to be unlawfully present during the period in which deferred action is in effect."

There is only one legal standard for lawful presence.  An alien to be considered lawfully present in the United States is for that alien to have been admitted in a non-immigrant or immigrant classification to the United States or to have been paroled into the United States.  Admitted or paroled, that is the standard.

However, DREAM Act Administrative Amnesty aliens have not been admitted in any non-immigrant or immigrant classification, nor have they been paroled.  Nor have they adjusted their status.  They have no status.  There is no legal classification for them.  They remain illegal aliens.

And this blog reported, this is just what the Regime admitted not so long ago when confronted with the question of qualification for Obamacare benefits for DREAM Act Administrative Amnesty illegal aliens.  Obamacare offers benefits to welfare seeking lawfully present aliens only.  Illegal aliens do not qualify.  And the Department of Health and Human Services admitted that DREAM Act Administrative Amnesty illegal aliens remain illegal aliens.

Furthermore, a closer analysis of the statement by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that DREAM Act Administrative Amnesty illegal aliens remain illegal aliens:

USCIS Website (Updated January 18, 2013)
Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals-Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Note that the FAQ was updated January 18, 2013 with this recent decision that illegal aliens are not illegal aliens.

But first lets examine what a DACA beneficiary is.  Note on the USCIS FAQs never mention alienage.  A serious error.  Nor do the FAQs mention that the beneficiary must be illegal, except in one sentence:

5. Entered without inspection before June 15, 2012, or your lawful immigration status expired as of June 15, 2012;

Then in the updated FAQ that makes the astounding claim that illegal aliens applying for DACA are lawfully present, the exact opposite is stated.

About Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
New - Q1: What is deferred action?
A1: Deferred action is a discretionary determination to defer removal action of an individual as an act of prosecutorial discretion. For purposes of future inadmissibility based upon unlawful presence, an individual whose case has been deferred is not considered to be unlawfully present during the period in which deferred action is in effect. An individual who has received deferred action is authorized by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to be present in the United States, and is therefore considered by DHS to be lawfully present during the period deferred action is in effect. 

But it then admits that the illegal aliens beneficiaries have no legal status:

However, deferred action does not confer lawful status upon an individual, nor does it excuse any previous or subsequent periods of unlawful presence.

Of course, an alien without lawful status is not lawfully present nor can said alien be considered to be lawfully present if it does not have a lawful status. Lawful status meaning having a non-immigrant or immigrant classification, and, by the way, not violating the terms and conditions of admission.

It is clear that the Regime only issued this "new" FAQ because several states, such as Arizona, have refused to issue driver's licenses to beneficiaries of the DREAM Act Administrative Amnesty.  And quite rightly, as this group of illegal aliens remain illegal aliens.

As even the tax-payer funded ICE Public Advocate for illegal aliens admits:

ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Public Advocate
About Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals FAQs
If My Case Is Deferred, Am I In Lawful Status For The Period Of My Deferral?
No.  Although action on your case has been deferred and you do not accrue unlawful presence during the period of deferred action, deferred action does not confer any lawful status.

There is a significant difference between "unlawful presence" and "unlawful status."  Unlawful presence refers to a period an individual is present in the United States (1) without being admitted or paroled or (2) after the expiration of a period of stay authorized by the Department of Homeland Security (such as after the period of stay authorized by a visa has expired).  Unlawful presence is relevant only with respect to determining whether the inadmissibility bars for unlawful presence, set forth in the Immigration and Nationality Act at Section 212(a)(9), apply to an individual if he or she departs the United States and subsequently seeks to re-enter.  (These unlawful presence bars are commonly known as the 3- and 10-Year Bars.) 
The fact that you are not accruing unlawful presence does not change whether you are in lawful status while you remain in the United States.  Because you lack lawful status at the time DHS defers action in your case you remain subject to all legal restrictions and prohibitions on individuals in unlawful status.

The Obama Regime's factually incorrect claim that a certain group of illegal aliens are lawfully present for driver's licenses but not for Obamacare is absurd on its face.  These beneficiaries of an illegal amnesty no more qualify for driver's licenses than they qualify to own firearms.  Illegal aliens can't possess firearms and the ICE Public Advocate recognized this important fact above.

It is in no way surprising given its contempt for the Constitution in the area of immigration law enforcement and other areas. But this Regime is not about either legal or Constitutional adherence or consistency.  It is about crushing of the nation beneath Stalinist boots.

Amnesty For Criminals

The criminal aspect of the ongoing Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty is in the news again.  One of the winners of the amnesty, Victor Mendoza Medina, is in the news.  And he has a long criminal history.

But first the back story.  Medina was deported long ago after a life of crime in the United States.  

USA Today  April 15, 2013 by Daniel Gonzalez
Immigrant Caught In The Middle Of National Debate
Victor Mendoza Medina is back in New York City six weeks after immigration-enforcement officers gave the Bolivian immigrant some surprising news — after more than three years locked up in a detention facility in Eloy, Ariz., he was being released...
Medina, now 69, has come to symbolize the political furor generated with the sudden release in February of more than 2,200 immigration detainees nationally. He was the only detainee released in Arizona classified as Level 1, the most serious aggravated felon...
Over the course of 90 minutes, Medina described a saga that spanned five decades, starting with his immigration to the U.S. as a teenager; his subsequent deportation to Bolivia; and then his return to the U.S. through the port of entry in Nogales, Ariz., which is how he ended up being held in a detention facility in Eloy for more than three years as he waged a legal battle to be released.
Medina is originally from La Paz, Bolivia's largest city and capital. He said he came to the United States as a legal permanent resident in 1963 when he was 18 and settled in New York City, which has a large community of Bolivian immigrants.

That's the back story, and here is his attitude:

Medina said he made a living as a long-haul truck driver for more than 30 years. As a legal permanent resident, he was eligible to apply for citizenship but never did, which looking back, "was the biggest mistake I made in my life."

The biggest mistake in his life was not applying for citizenship.  Apparently the life of crime was not the biggest mistake of his life.

ICE officials said the Level 1 detainee released in Arizona was convicted of multiple non-violent misdemeanors between 1972 and 2002, including five misdemeanors for drug possession, as well as misdemeanor theft and possession of stolen property.
The drug-possession charges involved small amounts of cocaine that were for personal use, Medina said, and the theft and possession-of-stolen-property charges involved a credit card a friend gave him.

So, over 45 years he managed to get convicted of 7 crimes.  That does not include the myriad of other crimes he committed without being arrested as no person is ever convicted of the only crime he ever committed, much less 7 crimes.  One is not convicted of 7 misdemeanors without  having committed several felonies as well.  Undoubtedly most of these 7 misdemeanors were not results of misdemeanor arrests but felony arrests and the misdemeanor convictions were the result of plea bargains.

And then there is explanation for the two non-drug convictions.  A friend gave him a credit card.  Why would a friend give him a credit card of a third person?  There is no reason for that.  It is clear that Medina and his friend were engaged in a credit card fraud scheme and he got caught.  This guy is probably the world's dumbest criminal.

Then there are the drug convictions.  All for cocaine possession for personal use?  Hard to believe.  That does not sound like a person not a danger to the public.  That sounds like a drug addict.  Which also tells us that besides the deportation charges for the criminal convictions, he is also deportable for being a drug addict per the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended.

(B) Controlled substances
(i) Conviction Any alien who at any time after admission has been convicted of a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law or regulation of a State, the United States, or a foreign country relating to a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of title 21), other than a single offense involving possession for one’s own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana, is deportable.
(ii) Drug abusers and addicts Any alien who is, or at any time after admission has been, a drug abuser or addict is deportable.

Medina is also deportable for multiple criminal offenses:

(2) Criminal offenses
(A) General crimes
(ii) Multiple criminal convictions Any alien who at any time after admission is convicted of two or more crimes involving moral turpitude, not arising out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct, regardless of whether confined therefor and regardless of whether the convictions were in a single trial, is deportable.

But even worse, Medina was deported.  But he returned anyway.  And he was taken back into the country for some reason, in violation of the law.  

In 2008, ICE deported Medina to Bolivia after an immigration judge ruled that two misdemeanor drug-conviction charges in 2001 and 2003 constituted, for immigration purposes, an aggravated felony, according to a court brief from his lawyer, Spencer Scharff, asking the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reopen Medina's case.
As a result of the judge's ruling, Medina was stripped of his legal status and deported. Medina said in Bolivia he went to the U.S. Embassy to try to claim the Social Security benefits he was receiving in the United States and was told that he never should have been deported. That prompted him to travel roughly 4,300 miles by bus from South America through Central America and Mexico until he reached Nogales in December 2009.

At the port, Medina said he told U.S. customs officers he was seeking to come back to the U.S. and have his status as a lawful permanent resident restored. After being paroled into the country, Medina was turned over to ICE and sent to a detention center in Eloy while his case was pending.

At the time Medina was an arriving alien applying for admission.  Because he was applying for admission, he should have been refused admission as he did not have a valid immigrant or non-immigrant visa, with the required waiver for the previous deportation.  Moreover, since he was applying for admission at a land Port-of-Entry, he should have been placed in removal proceedings, but required to wait in Mexico, if DHS was going to allow him the benefit of a hearing under the law.

(d) Service custody. The Service will assume custody of any alien subject to detention under paragraph (b) or (c) of this section. In its discretion, the Service may require any alien who appears inadmissible and who arrives at a land border port-of-entry from Canada or Mexico, to remain in that country while awaiting a removal hearing.  

More importantly, there was no legal basis for Medina's claim that he was deported unlawfully.  That claim should have been made at the time he was deported.  He failed to purse that claim.  He had his due process of law and failed to purse it.  Once you are deported, there is no relief.  There is a final order of removal and Medina is no longer a legal permanent resident.

But in any event, U.S. Customs and Border Protection should have refused entry to Medina and issued an Order of Removal under Section 235(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, the Expedited Removal provision.

(b) Inspection of Applicants for Admission.-
(1) Inspection of aliens arriving in the United States and certain other aliens who have not been admitted or paroled.-
(A) Screening.-
(i) In general.-If an immigration officer determines that an alien (other than an alien described in subparagraph (F)) who is arriving in the United States or is described in clause (iii) is inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(C) or 212(a)(7) , the officer shall order the alien removed from the United States without further hearing or review unless the alien indicates either an intention to apply for asylum under section 208 or a fear of persecution.

Medina should not have been allowed to remain and file and plea to any court.  However, it is clear the Regime is counting on the courts to support the Administrative Amnesty.  An amnesty that this blog predicted would soon extend to criminals.  

Also of note, the Rubio RINO Amnesty includes provisions for amnesty for those illegal aliens with 2 misdemeanor convictions.  Remember, misdemeanors are felonies that a prosecutor does not want or too busy to take to trial.