President Trump ends DACA, but gives Congress 6-month window to deliver solution; Apple CEO Tim Cook ‘stands with’ 250 DACA-protected employees

“The Trump administration on Tuesday formally announced the end of DACA — a program that had protected nearly 800,000 young undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children from deportation,” Tal Kopan reports for CNN. “The Department of Homeland Security will stop processing any new applications for the program as of Tuesday and rescinded the Obama administration policy, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. ‘I am here today to announce that the program known as DACA that was effectuated under the Obama administration is being rescinded,’ Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Tuesday at the Justice Department.”

“In the five years since DACA was enacted… nearly 800,000 individuals who have received the protections,” Kopan reports. “In a statement after his agencies and attorney general announced the decision, President Donald Trump blamed former President Barack Obama for creating the program through executive authority and urged Congress to come up with a solution… The administration also announced a plan to continue renewing permits for anyone whose status expires in the next six months, giving Congress time to act.”

“The Trump administration pitched the move as the ‘least disruptive’ option available after facing a threat from 10 conservative state attorneys general to challenge the program in court, according to senior administration officials briefing reporters on the move during a conference call conducted on condition of anonymity,” Kopan reports. “Sessions had determined that the program would not be likely to withstand that court challenge, he said. ‘The Department of Justice cannot defend this overreach,’ Sessions said. ‘There is nothing compassionate about the failure to enforce immigration laws. Enforcing the law saves lives, protects communities and taxpayers, and prevents human suffering. Failure to enforce the laws in the past has put our nation at risk of crime, violence and even terrorism. The compassionate thing is to end the lawlessness, (and) enforce our laws.'”

“The administration insisted its approach was designed to offer some security to DACA recipients, emphasizing that if it had allowed the courts to decide the issue, then would have been risking an immediate and abrupt end to DACA at the hands of a judge,” Kopan reports. “But it also was made clear that once DACA begins to expire, if Congress doesn’t act, then people formerly protected ‘would be like any other person who’s in the country illegally,’ according to a senior DHS official… ‘To be clear, what ICE is doing now is what Congress intended, we’re actually enforcing the law the way it is written,’ said a senior ICE official. ‘This is the first President who’s asked us to enforce the law the way it is written and not asked us to have some executive interpretation of the law.’ The officials placed the onus on Congress to make any changes to the system.”

In anticipation of the sunsetting of the DACA program, Apple CEO Tim Cook on Sunday tweeting the following:

 
Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Note: U.S. President Trump earlier today tweeted specifically about the DACA policy:

SEE ALSO:
Apple CEO Tim Cook signs letter encouraging President Trump to preserve the DACA ‘Dreamers’ program – September 1, 2017
Laurene Powell Jobs’ Emerson Collective buying The Atlantic – July 28, 2017
President Trump tells Apple CEO Cook that U.S. needs comprehensive immigration reform – June 20, 2017
Laurene Powell Jobs launches new website in ‘DREAM Act’ push – January 22, 2013
Laurene Powell Jobs looks to create bipartisan support for DREAM Act immigration reform – December 18, 2012

64 Comments

      1. El Cheeto Traitor strikes again. This dude and white supremacist elf Attorney General hates brown people no matter what part of the globe they come from.

        Anyone who thought he wouldn’t do this, is clearly supremely stupid. The dude hates brown people and supports people and hires who hates brown people. Children be damned. Though, if they’re pretty girls, he might give them a “grab ’em by the pussy” freebee.

        MAGA – was a Russian Operation. Congrats Putin.

    1. Au contraire. History already is not kind to Obama or his dupes.

      Here are 22 Times Obama Said He Couldn’t Ignore or Create His Own Immigration Law

      1. “I take the Constitution very seriously. The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with [the president] trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m President of the United States of America.” (3/31/08)

      2. “We’ve got a government designed by the Founders so that there’d be checks and balances. You don’t want a president who’s too powerful or a Congress that’s too powerful or a court that’s too powerful. Everybody’s got their own role. Congress’s job is to pass legislation. The president can veto it or he can sign it. … I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We’re not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end-run around Congress.” (5/19/08)

      3. “Comprehensive reform, that’s how we’re going to solve this problem. … Anybody who tells you it’s going to be easy or that I can wave a magic wand and make it happen hasn’t been paying attention to how this town works.” (5/5/10)

      4. “[T]here are those in the immigrants’ rights community who have argued passionately that we should simply provide those who are [here] illegally with legal status, or at least ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until we have better laws. … I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair. It would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. And it would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally. Ultimately, our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship. And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable.” (7/1/10)

      5. “I do have an obligation to make sure that I am following some of the rules. I can’t simply ignore laws that are out there. I’ve got to work to make sure that they are changed.” (10/14/10)

      6. “I am president, I am not king. I can’t do these things just by myself. We have a system of government that requires the Congress to work with the Executive Branch to make it happen. I’m committed to making it happen, but I’ve got to have some partners to do it. … The main thing we have to do to stop deportations is to change the laws. … [T]he most important thing that we can do is to change the law because the way the system works – again, I just want to repeat, I’m president, I’m not king. If Congress has laws on the books that says that people who are here who are not documented have to be deported, then I can exercise some flexibility in terms of where we deploy our resources, to focus on people who are really causing problems as a opposed to families who are just trying to work and support themselves. But there’s a limit to the discretion that I can show because I am obliged to execute the law. That’s what the Executive Branch means. I can’t just make the laws up by myself. So the most important thing that we can do is focus on changing the underlying laws.” (10/25/10)

      7. “America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the President, am obligated to enforce the law. I don’t have a choice about that. That’s part of my job. But I can advocate for changes in the law so that we have a country that is both respectful of the law but also continues to be a great nation of immigrants. … With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed …. [W]e’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws. There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.” (3/28/11)

      8. “I can’t solve this problem by myself. … [W]e’re going to have to have bipartisan support in order to make it happen. … I can’t do it by myself. We’re going to have to change the laws in Congress, but I’m confident we can make it happen.” (4/20/11)

      9/ “I know some here wish that I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself. But that’s not how democracy works. See, democracy is hard. But it’s right. Changing our laws means doing the hard work of changing minds and changing votes, one by one.” (4/29/11)

      10. “Sometimes when I talk to immigration advocates, they wish I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself. But that’s not how a democracy works. What we really need to do is to keep up the fight to pass genuine, comprehensive reform. That is the ultimate solution to this problem. That’s what I’m committed to doing.” (5/10/11)

      11. “I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books …. Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. Believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you. Not just on immigration reform. But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.” (7/25/11)

      12. “So what we’ve tried to do is within the constraints of the laws on the books, we’ve tried to be as fair, humane, just as we can, recognizing, though, that the laws themselves need to be changed. … The most important thing for your viewers and listeners and readers to understand is that in order to change our laws, we’ve got to get it through the House of Representatives, which is currently controlled by Republicans, and we’ve got to get 60 votes in the Senate. … Administratively, we can’t ignore the law. … I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true. We are doing everything we can administratively. But the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce. And I think there’s been a great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetrating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things. It’s just not true. … We live in a democracy. You have to pass bills through the legislature, and then I can sign it. And if all the attention is focused away from the legislative process, then that is going to lead to a constant dead-end. We have to recognize how the system works, and then apply pressure to those places where votes can be gotten and, ultimately, we can get this thing solved.” (9/28/11)

      In June 2012, President Obama unilaterally granted deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA), allowing “eligible individuals who do not present a risk to national security or public safety … to request temporary relief from deportation proceedings and apply for work authorization.” He then argued that he had already done everything he could legally do on his own:

      13. “Now, what I’ve always said is, as the head of the executive branch, there’s a limit to what I can do. Part of the reason that deportations went up was Congress put a whole lot of money into it, and when you have a lot of resources and a lot more agents involved, then there are going to be higher numbers. What we’ve said is, let’s make sure that you’re not misdirecting those resources. But we’re still going to, ultimately, have to change the laws in order to avoid some of the heartbreaking stories that you see coming up occasionally. And that’s why this continues to be a top priority of mine. … And we will continue to make sure that how we enforce is done as fairly and justly as possible. But until we have a law in place that provides a pathway for legalization and/or citizenship for the folks in question, we’re going to continue to be bound by the law. … And so part of the challenge as President is constantly saying, ‘what authorities do I have?’” (9/20/12)

      14. “We are a nation of immigrants. … But we’re also a nation of laws. So what I’ve said is, we need to fix a broken immigration system. And I’ve done everything that I can on my own[.]” (10/16/12)

      15. “I’m not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I’m required to follow the law. And that’s what we’ve done. But what I’ve also said is, let’s make sure that we’re applying the law in a way that takes into account people’s humanity. That’s the reason that we moved forward on deferred action. Within the confines of the law we said, we have some discretion in terms of how we apply this law.” (1/30/13)

      16. “I’m not a king. You know, my job as the head of the executive branch ultimately is to carry out the law. And, you know, when it comes to enforcement of our immigration laws, we’ve got some discretion. We can prioritize what we do. But we can’t simply ignore the law. When it comes to the dreamers, we were able to identify that group and say, ‘These folks are generally not a risk. They’re not involved in crime. … And so let’s prioritize our enforcement resources.’ But to sort through all the possible cases of everybody who might have a sympathetic story to tell is very difficult to do. This is why we need comprehensive immigration reform. To make sure that once and for all, in a way that is, you know, ratified by Congress, we can say that there is a pathway to citizenship for people who are staying out of trouble, who are trying to do the right thing, who’ve put down roots here. … My job is to carry out the law. And so Congress gives us a whole bunch of resources. They give us an order that we’ve got to go out there and enforce the laws that are on the books. … If this was an issue that I could do unilaterally I would have done it a long time ago. … The way our system works is Congress has to pass legislation. I then get an opportunity to sign it and implement it.” (1/30/13)

      17. “This is something I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that I’m the president of the United States, I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed. And Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system. And what that means is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic. … [W]e’ve kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can[.]” (2/14/13)

      18. “I think that it is very important for us to recognize that the way to solve this problem has to be legislative. I can do some things and have done some things that make a difference in the lives of people by determining how our enforcement should focus. … And we’ve been able to provide help through deferred action for young people …. But this is a problem that needs to be fixed legislatively.” (7/16/13)

      19. “My job in the executive branch is supposed to be to carry out the laws that are passed. Congress has said ‘here is the law’ when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they’ve allocated a whole bunch of money for enforcement. And, what I have been able to do is to make a legal argument that I think is absolutely right, which is that given the resources that we have, we can’t do everything that Congress has asked us to do. What we can do is then carve out the DREAM Act folks, saying young people who have basically grown up here are Americans that we should welcome. … But if we start broadening that, then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally. So that’s not an option. … What I’ve said is there is a there’s a path to get this done, and that’s through Congress.” (9/17/13)

      20. “[I]f, 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. And so the easy way out is to try to yell and pretend like I can do something by violating our laws. And what I’m proposing is the harder path, which is to use our democratic processes to achieve the same goal that you want to achieve. … It is not simply a matter of us just saying we’re going to violate the law. That’s not our tradition. The great thing about this country is we have this wonderful process of democracy, and sometimes it is messy, and sometimes it is hard, but ultimately, justice and truth win out.” (11/25/13)

      21. “I am the Champion-in-Chief of comprehensive immigration reform. But what I’ve said in the past remains true, which is until Congress passes a new law, then I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do. What I’ve done is to use my prosecutorial discretion, because you can’t enforce the laws across the board for 11 or 12 million people, there aren’t the resources there. What we’ve said is focus on folks who are engaged in criminal activity, focus on people who are engaged in gang activity. Do not focus on young people, who we’re calling DREAMers …. That already stretched my administrative capacity very far. But I was confident that that was the right thing to do. But at a certain point the reason that these deportations are taking place is, Congress said, ‘you have to enforce these laws.’ They fund the hiring of officials at the department that’s charged with enforcing. And I cannot ignore those laws any more than I could ignore, you know, any of the other laws that are on the books. That’s why it’s so important for us to get comprehensive immigration reform done this year.” (3/6/14)

      22. “I think that I never have a green light [to push the limits of executive power]. I’m bound by the Constitution; I’m bound by separation of powers. There are some things we can’t do. Congress has the power of the purse, for example. … Congress has to pass a budget and authorize spending. So I don’t have a green light. … My preference in all these instances is to work with Congress, because not only can Congress do more, but it’s going to be longer-lasting.” (8/6/14)

      1. Nice screed, but Obama is not President and I did not vote for him. You need a new bogeyman.

        When the debt ceiling is hit shortly, the Republicans will be the ones who have to swallow hard and vote for it. Oh, the hypocrisy!
        Just like the Southern Republicans that voted against relief for Sandy but want the taps opened for Tejas and soon Floriduh.

        Maybe we should just tell them to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps… nah.
        Then we would be as bad as you.

      2. Fwhatever, the quotes that you supplied actually support Obama’s respect for the law, his understanding of the issue, and his compassion for the group now known as DREAMers. Obama simply prioritized ICE enforcement resources towards criminal undocumented people in the U.S., which makes a lot of sense.

        One of the reasons that the DREAM effort has lasted for five years is that Congress was gridlocked by an obstructionist group of Republicans who wanted to make Obama appear ineffective by preventing any and all legislative efforts from moving forward. Now that a Republican President has Republican majorities in both the House and the Senate, you would think that progress could be made, especially since Democrats in Congress will support reasonable immigration reform.

        This is one case in which I could find myself supporting Trump’s action, if not for the following considerations:

        1) This is clearly Trump’s weaselly way of appealing to his base by adhering to a campaign promise while attempting to avoid the political consequences by throwing it over the fence to Congress (Trump’s SOP)

        2) The current Republican-led Congress seems incapable of implementing constructive and well-reasoned legislative actions. As a result, the six month grace period is highly unlikely to be sufficient for Congress to deal with DACA.

        “So what we’ve tried to do is within the constraints of the laws on the books, we’ve tried to be as fair, humane, just as we can, recognizing, though, that the laws themselves need to be changed. … The most important thing for your viewers and listeners and readers to understand is that in order to change our laws, we’ve got to get it through the House of Representatives, which is currently controlled by Republicans, and we’ve got to get 60 votes in the Senate.”

        “And, you know, when it comes to enforcement of our immigration laws, we’ve got some discretion. We can prioritize what we do. But we can’t simply ignore the law. When it comes to the dreamers, we were able to identify that group and say, ‘These folks are generally not a risk. They’re not involved in crime. … And so let’s prioritize our enforcement resources.'”

        I don’t know why you despise Obama so much, Fwhatever. But, in this case, you have utterly failed in your attempt to denigrate him. He took a reasonable and appropriate action in the face of Congressional inaction.

    1. I wouldn’t go as far as “ever.” Texas Republicans like me are already looking like an endangered species. Only 42% of the residents of this state are Non-Hispanic White. Just two things are keeping us Republicans in power:

      1. For a variety of reasons, minority voters turn out in smaller numbers, particularly in non-national elections. That isn’t enough to retain Republican power in the long run, because the proportion of minorities is rising (from birth rate and movement from other states, not so much international immigration).

      2. As they climb into the entrepreneurial and professional ranks, minorities have historically been increasingly likely to vote for Republicans. Many of our our local and state Republican leaders have responded to this by making program adjustments to meet the minority community’s aspirations. Texas was one of the first states to offer Dreamers in-state college tuition, for example (they pay taxes, so why not?).

      All that has gone into the dumpster over the last 18 months or so. We have a titular head of our party who

      • Used his very first speech as a presidential candidate to label Mexican immigrants (and not just illegal immigrants) as drug dealers and rapists.

      •After allowing in that speech that “some Mexican immigrants might be good people,” he later insisted that “many, many” of those who marched through Charlottesville with Nazis and the KKK chanting white-power and anti-immigrant slogans were “very good people.”

      • Has focused his immigration policies on closing the southern border with a wall, even though roughly half of all undocumented US residents entered openly through a point of entry and then overstayed their legal right to remain (there are roughly 100,000 undocumented immigrants from the British Isles, for example). The implication is that Latin Americans are a bigger threat to the US than other groups.

      •Has threatened to confiscate the gift payments sent by Americans (citizens and legal residents) of Latin American descent to their needy relatives abroad and use their money to pay for the wall.

      • Went on to suggest that an Indiana-born judge whose parents legally immigrated to the US before Mr. Trump’s mother arrived was unqualified because his parents came from Mexico rather than Scotland.

      •Has suggested that immigrants are largely responsible for US crime. Their crime rate is actually one-half to one-fifth lower than the rate for natural-born US citizens. They are 7% of the US population, but only 5% of the incarcerated population (and that includes those detained only for immigration offenses).

      •Has proposed immigration policies that would make legal entry almost impossible for anyone who “looks like” the immigrant parents of today’s Hispanic population, people with an agricultural or blue-collar background.

      •Now, he has suspended the ability of persons brought to America as children to apply for work permits. He is setting up Congress to take the blame for a failure to act on this issue (which will happen, because the Democrats and border-state Republicans will demand a comprehensive immigration bill that the rest of our party will not support).

      For a Texan who can read and has a sense of history, our situation looks a lot like California a few decades back. Despite the obvious demographic trends, a state government entirely dominated by Republican officials offended minority voters to the extent that there are now no statewide Republican officials.

      1. Actually, TxUser, I submit that political gerrymandering of the districts has been instrumental in keeping Republicans in power in Texas. Republican representation at the state level far exceeds the size of the Republican voting block. But even the most ardent gerrymandering will fail in the face of the ongoing demographic transitions that you noted.

    2. botty, if you truly believe what you post, then you are even nuttier than I already believed. There are relatively few legitimate statements that include the word “never.”

      Democrats were elected POTUS in 1960, 1964, 1976, 1992, 1996, 2008, and 2012. Republicans were elected POTUS in 1968, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, 2008, and 2016. Somehow you believe that the latter has become an infinite series?! What a joke! You are your own worst enemy to your credibility on this forum.

      1. Please do a comparison of the Democrat party of 1960 (JFK) and the Democrat party of 2017 (Chuck Schemer.)

        The Plantation Party is over. The 2018 midterms will be a bloodbath.

        1. Absolutely right, James.

          I make an attempt to engage those I disagree with in a civil manner.

          But sometimes the relentless stalking insult artists, and we know who they are banned or not, you end up giving what you get. Not defending or proud of it, it just happens.

          But agree with your optimism … 👍🏻

      1. I down vote botty even when he agrees with me. He espouses repulsive bigotry.
        He thinks there is some “fake vote” system always down voting him. I think it’s just a whole bunch of people like me, who see his infamous nickname and click 1-star reflexively.

  1. An immigrant who is working through the legal residency or citizenship process with the State Department, should be welcomed. Those are the people who are following laws to live/work here and in some cases become citizens of the US. Many of us have ancestors who followed this path, the LEGAL path. These people are an essential part of the “melting pot” that makes us all great Americans.

    An illegal immigrant is simply an unconvicted criminal. Being here is illegally is a crime. Law enforcement and government should do all they can to remove these law breakers from our city/county/state/country. Every cent spent on services is a cent stolen from citizens and legal residents. All illegal immigrants should be sent back to the country that they are a citizen of. They are not a citizen of this one. If their own country is not “good enough” for them, they can work on improving their country. THEIR COUNTRY.

    Just imagine how much more money there will be (for citizens/legal residents) in our budgets if illegal immigrants were not here. More money in aid programs, better teacher/student ratios, etc.. Yes, those illegal immigrant children are causing your kids to get a poorer education. Money spent on their classroom, their lunch, their supplies, etc, are not being spent on your (citizen/legal resident) kids. If the illegals were not here, how much better would our school system be with billion of “free additional” dollars to spend on citizens and legal residents?

    An illegal immigrant parent, or couple, with an illegal immigrant child has it pretty good. The child gets public education, they get welfare programs for food, housing, medical expenses, etc., direct benefits like Medicare and Social Security, and services like Police, Fire, parks, highways and the courts. Every time an illegal gets a benefit dollar, a citizen is denied a dollar.

    Our community and country are better with the legal immigrants and legal residents here.
    Our life, our cities, counties and the state are poorer with illegals being here.

      1. You have clearly never worked in a public school, a prison, or on the police force. I’m just going to venture a guess that you live on one of the coasts. They aren’t lies, and they aren’t xenophobic. It isn’t the whole picture, either, but it is a big part of it, one that we ignore at our own peril. A person’s origin has absolutely zero bearing on the facts of the issue, and facts they are, and jettisoning DACA, which was incredibly ill-conceived, is not tantamount to a witch hunt.

        1. Lies because you only look at the “cost” side. You are either ignorant, or deliberately trying to mislead people.
          Undocumented workers are extremely important to the U.S. economy. They actually DO pay taxes into systems (Social Security, for example) they won’t benefit from.
          Furthermore, the idea that being __brought here by your parents when you are a child__, which is what we are talking about with DACA, means that YOU have committed a crime is a disgusting belief to hold.

      2. I worked in the criminal justice system in Texas from 1974 to 2010. I can assure you that what beosjim said is not correct. I would not call it a lie, because I’m sure he honestly believes what he said.

        To begin with, it is not a crime to be here without papers, but only to enter illegally. Over 40% of current undocumented residents entered legally, and then overstayed their permission to remain. That is a “civil offense,” but it is not a crime. Since the Dreamers were too young to have criminal liability when they entered, they have committed no offense.

        Poverty is strongly associated with crime, so there are certainly a significant number of both criminals and victims who are poor immigrants. Nevertheless, immigrants are statistically less likely to commit a crime (other than an immigration-related offense) than citizens of a comparable socio-economic status. About 7% of the US population is immigrants, but only 5% of those in jail or prison.

        Study after study has shown that immigrants pay taxes at the same rate as citizens. Those with work permits (like DACA registrants) pay income and other payroll taxes. Every time an undocumented person in Texas spends a dollar, he spends $0.085 in sales tax that a citizen does not have to pay. They pay real estate taxes (mostly indirectly, through their rent) just like citizens. School funding in Texas is based on pupil population, so aliens earn their district just as much state aid as legal residents. If they weren’t there, school funding would go down, not up.

        Indeed, since they are not eligible for many public welfare programs, they pull more than their own weight. Immigrants cannot receive Medicare, Medicaid, or most other benefits unless they have been a legal resident for at least five years. Because they are afraid of being deported, they make fewer calls on police services, the courts, and many other public services.

        We should not have open borders. We should have tighter controls on immigration. That doesn’t mean that we should be deporting 800,000 Dreamers and up to 11 million other US residents.

  2. Just saw an interview with a woman who came to this country when two months old. She has never visited her birth country. She is married to a soldier being deployed to Afghanistan. It is sad to contemplate that this soldier must wonder if his wife will be deported to a land foreign to her while he is fighting for “their” country. This is cruel, simple as that.

    1. What was cruel was their parents bringing them or conceiving them in the first place knowing exactly what the repercussions might be. It truly isn’t these kids’ fault (and that should be taken into consideration for those with no criminal records, in my opinion), but we have laws. The bipartisan immigration bill that failed was a great start, I thought. Had it passed, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation.

      That said, it’s a tricky situation. I expect it will take more than a fortnight to sort it out, but sort it out we will. DACA was not the way to accomplish this, Obama should have never circumvented Congress, in my opinion, no matter how long it took.

      Also, Tim Cook can pretty much kiss my butt, I really don’t care for his thoughts on the weather at this point.

  3. Tim, So at least 250 of your workers were illegals?
    I don’t want to be rude, but how many years those people were living in USA and never worried to became legan immigrants? Why it is that the term “iLEGAL” became a normal situation? something to be friendly with? what’s next? beep not registering their cars? not paying taxes? not paying for anything? socialism?

    1. See above, where I explained that these folks are not “illegals.” The Dreamers were brought to America as children; they did not choose to come here. They have committed no criminal offense. They are noncitizens, certainly, but so were American Indians before 1924. Besides which, when Apple hired these folks, they had legal work permits. That’s why DACA was created.

      As a practical matter, there is no current mechanism for somebody in the United States who is not already in compliance with all the immigration laws to apply for legal status without returning to the country where they are currently a citizen and going to the back of the line for a visa… assuming that they could even qualify for one.

      The various proposals for a Dream Act would allow those brought here as children to apply for legal residency and citizenship without having to go to a foreign country with which they have nothing in common and try to survive the unfamiliar local conditions during the wait.

  4. This world is crazy, IF one president goes around congress, those who like that president will say it is good and wonderful; If the next president does the same, the first group will say it is illegal to go around congress.

    This is what is known as the beginning of destruction through anarchy!

    anarchy: when laws don’t have any meaning!

    1. Except that in this case only one (the former) president went around congress. The current one is asking congress to correctly do what the prior one did wrongly – totally asking congress to do their jobs.

Leave a Reply to DavGreg Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.