Undermine the Constitution at Your Own Peril, Too

The Founding Fathers designed the separation of powers in our Constitution to protect us from tyranny. And, of course, that’s by far most important function of the Constitution’s checks and balances. But President Obama is finding out that it also can protect a president from undue political pressure.

Before he decided that he would further rewrite the law to suit open borders pressure groups on his own, President Obama himself said to a protestor who interrupted his speech in San Francisco, “if in fact I could solve all these problems without passing laws in Congress, then I would do so. But we’re also a nation of laws. That’s part of our tradition.”

However, he had already shown, with his implementation of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an administrative version of the DREAM Act that failed to pass Congress, that to him, these were just empty words. Less than a year before implementing DACA, President Obama had in fact asserted that to do so would be a violation of the law. No wonder that open borders groups now brush aside assertions that he cannot simply do whatever they demand.

Now, though vulnerable Senate Democrats would prefer that the President not grant unilaterally before the election, there is little he can do to satisfy them without in turn angering the open borders pressure groups that believe there should be nothing stopping them from getting their way. As amnesty activist Lorella Praeli says, President Obama “has made certain promises to our community, and he has made those promises public.” She went on to threaten: “The truth is, nothing and no one will stand in the way of relief for our communities, and we will make sure everyone is held accountable.”

No matter what he does, President Obama is unlikely to satisfy every activist with a demand. For instance, some illegal alien pressure groups find a unilateral amnesty that excludes those with criminal records to be insufficient. But an amnesty that includes those with felony records is likely to cause even more distress to a public that has already rejected the President’s immigration policy, including some of the President’s own supporters.  If the President had not unlawfully rejected Congress’ Constitutional authority to write the nation’s immigration laws, he could have deflected some of this pressure from himself onto members of Congress. But now he can’t.

It turns out, as much as President Obama likes to lament the confines of the American political system, it could have helped him, as well as the public. President Obama, having taught his open borders supporters that American political constraints do not apply, has also taught them that they have only him to blame for failing to satisfy all of their ultimatums.

About Author


The latest guest opinion pieces from FAIR.


  1. avatar

    If all of the 12 million illegal aliens import their kids and have five per family, that’s about 60 million more welfare cases at the local welfare office with the bill sent to local property owners.

  2. avatar

    Which article in the constitution authorizes the government to control immigration? Immigration is different than Naturalization. Naturalization is the government giving you citizenship. Immigration is the person moving from one country to another, but not getting citizenship. The immigrant can apply for naturalization.
    So it would be up the individual states to make any laws required for immigration control.
    So if you are going to make an appeal to the constitution, then cite the article that says the feds have the lawful right to do anything about immigration.
    Getting rid of the welfare would be the most helpful thing that could be done to end this madness. Border control may end up being a reason for more police state activity. Actions have consequences, make sure you think it through carefully. Fences can be used to keep people in, as well as out.

  3. avatar

    Obeying the Constitution is Not a Choice, Its a Necessity, as a Any Politician Knows and Gave Oath To

    It is DEFINITELY not a race or bigot issue to obey the Constitution on immigration laws, as most open border pundits wildly allege as a lame excuse.

  4. avatar

    If you read the link under “threaten” in blue, it’s another case of a reporter who just reads the press handouts. She claims the Senate “reform” bill of last year contained “ramped up border security”. Nope, not even close. It’s merely goals for in the future that may or may not occur. The legalization is up front and set in stone. E-verify and border security were not. They’re just smoke and mirrors like the 1986 amnesty. And will have the same results. None. Speaking of reporters, it’s amusing to watch some of them and a lot of the public try to spin the story of that Missouri teenager. What does the fact that he committed a strong arm robbery have to do with anything they ask. Everything, because it makes the cop’s story far more likely that they were struggling. Another little choir boy turns out to be a hoodlum and certain people can’t admit it.

    • avatar
      John WInthrop on

      Leland….it is actually simpler than that……………..we will have eventually half the country + of descendants of illegals how do you like that?………..since you promote no changes, no IR…basically no future nor progress,,,,,as a result…..you will see in you old age…..remember me JW…..if htis happens…….

      • avatar

        The “reform” and “progress” and “changes” you claim to want means foreign citizens should feel free to ignore our immigration laws and eventually we will reward you with legalization. I disagree with that.

        • avatar
          John WInthrop on

          You can disagree but it will happen…..you are in denial…..remember before the crisis at the border what I told you…..it will get worse…..now what?…..I tell you again it will get much much worse…unless we update the Laws and we protect ourselves……just sit back and watch……even a monkey can conclude this……

          • avatar
            John WInthrop on

            Keep on being in denial ….that is the difference between you and the res of people that understands what needs to be done……the ones that do and the ones like you.

      • avatar

        Those “descendants of illegal aliens” will likely be ending up in jail for breaking various laws other than immigration laws, given that they have parents who believe that laws, any laws, don’t apply to them and are probably teaching their kids that. Or, they’ll continue living in poverty, just like their parents, having kids they can’t afford to support. The few that really do succeed may well wonder why on earth they should support illegal aliens with their taxes.

        • avatar
          John WInthrop on

          Many illegals are whiter, yellower and blacker etc etc, wealthier, smarter . and contributed to the US more than you and I together…..so those descendants will be Americans,,,u think they r all ignorant and brown and you are the ignorant and the brown one…..stop being a bigot….

          • avatar

            On average, illegals have less education and lower incomes than the average American. You’re confusing facts and bigotry, which you always do.

          • avatar
            John WInthrop on

            What I said it is a fact……I do not see the bigotry unless it is in you….which you always show and express……..I could easily say the average american is dumb and lazy like you….did I get it right?….if I follow your logic yes…….am I right? probably yes……………..