{"id":6807,"date":"2014-06-02T15:22:10","date_gmt":"2014-06-02T19:22:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=6807"},"modified":"2018-12-28T14:58:22","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T19:58:22","slug":"homeland-security-secretary-laws-like-californias-necessitate-amnesty-create-legal-ambiguity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2014\/06\/02\/homeland-security-secretary-laws-like-californias-necessitate-amnesty-create-legal-ambiguity\/","title":{"rendered":"Homeland Security Secretary: Laws Like California\u2019s Necessitate Amnesty, Create \u201cLegal Ambiguity\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"

During a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) oversight hearing<\/a> on Thursday before the House Judiciary Committee, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson admitted state laws like California\u2019s<\/a>, giving<\/a> various licenses<\/a> to illegal aliens, reduce the likelihood that the illegal aliens will ever choose to leave the country. \u201cThere are states now where they are permitted to have driver\u2019s licenses. [The] California Supreme Court says than an undocumented immigrant in this country can practice law. So they\u2019re not going away. They\u2019re not going to self deport,\u201d he told the Committee. Illegal aliens\u2019 decision not to leave on their own, a decision Secretary Johnson admitted is influenced by favorable treatment, means that we have no choice but to give virtually all of them amnesty. \u201cThe likelihood is next to zero that they will all self deport,\u201d he said. \u201cWe have to accept the fact that we have 11.5 million undocumented immigrants in this country, we have to deal with them. I don\u2019t think we should allow them to continue to exist in a state of legal ambiguity or in a dark hole.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/object><\/code><\/p>\n

Of course, there is no \u201clegal ambiguity\u201d regarding the status of illegal aliens, regardless of how many benefits states like California choose to give them.\u00a0 Their presence in the country is unambiguously unlawful, whether or not the State of California decides they are not committing a state violation on top of whatever federal violations of immigration law they are committing when they drive, or hold themselves out as a California lawyer.\u00a0 The only possible \u201clegal ambiguity\u201d that could exist in regard to any illegal aliens currently in this country is that deliberately caused by the administration, with unconstitutional programs like DACA <\/a>\u00a0that purport to create a kind of lawful presence for certain categories of illegal aliens. The solution to any such ambiguity created by the administration implementing acts that Congress never passed into law, of course, is for the Administration to dismantle the unlawful programs, not for Congress to pass a law blessing the President\u2019s unconstitutional behavior.<\/p>\n

If laws like California\u2019s did<\/i> create any legal ambiguity, the Administration could solve this problem by suing California, as it sued Arizona for SB 1070<\/a>. However, despite Secretary Johnson\u2019s later laughable assurance in the hearing that he agrees that \u201cthere should be disincentives to engage in illegal migration,\u201d this Administration will only take actions against states that discourage illegal immigration, not ones that encourage it.\u00a0 After all, if the Administration weren\u2019t ensuring that no consequences are faced by illegal aliens for breaking the nation\u2019s immigration laws, how could it say that we need an amnesty because no significant number will ever go home on their own?<\/p>\n

<\/object><\/code>