Some Pro-Immigration Groups Still Giving President Obama a Free Pass


racist rethuglican

President Obama has had an awful track record on immigration policy. During his administration, there have been, for example, a record amount of deportations. Most recently, the administration has been criticized for dumping more than a thousand illegal immigrant children in Arizona. As immigration advocates decry the inhumane situation, the president insists he has little flexibility on immigration policy and must wait for Congress, even as on a slew of other issues—from No Child Left Behind to his own Obamacare—he's used questionable executive power to unilaterally change the law. Here no such legally questionable action would be needed. Immigration policy is within the purview of the executive branch, and it could choose to enforce the law in a different, and still completely legal, way.

Nevertheless, because most of them are liberal, some pro-immigration groups are, six years into Obama's awful immigration policy, still offering a free pass the man who as senator helped torpedo President Bush's immigration efforts nearly a decade ago.

Here is a statement, for example, released by the executive director of the group, Arturo Carmona:

Eric Cantor's defeat at the hand's [sic] of a tea party extremist prove what many of us have been saying for quite some time: immigration reform is dead in this Republican Congress. In the face of growing xenophobic and racially charged extremism, the only thing that can stop the tearing apart of families and inhumane treatment of immigrants is executive action. We urge President Obama to face the facts, stand up to the xenophobic and hateful forces in America, and take action to stop deportations immediately. Anything less is unacceptable to Latinos across the country.

Got it? Some Republicans are xenophobic, therefore they are to blame for the president's "inhumane" actions. Rather than applying pressure on the Obama Administration by lobbing some well-deserved criticism at it, chooses to demonize someone who has not yet even entered Congress. Not the man in charge of the government that's "tearing apart" families, but one man about to join a body of 535, whose party is in control of just one of the chambers.

David Brat may be awful on liberal immigration policy, but he's hardly a one-issue candidate who ran a one-issue campaign. Anti-immigration advocates may point to Cantor's loss as evidence that immigration reform is an electoral loser, but that pro-immigration advocates buy into this narrative so fully only makes sense if they're not interested in holding President Obama accountable for six years of awful immigration policy.

Though it would be too much to expect of a liberal special interest group, anyone truly concerned about xenophobia would have seen it in the actions and rhetoric of President Obama—and not just his immigration policy. Obama spent most of the 2012 campaign railing against outsourcing, a xenophobic policy position that considers foreign workers and their drive to work dangerous simply because they're not Americans.

NEXT: Why Did GOP House Majority Leader Eric Cantor Lose His Primary?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s amusing to watch libertarians try to convince their readers that Obama is the bad guy when it comes to immigration and that the Republicans, well, okay, some if them are incorrigible but the rest aren’t so bad! Uh-huh. I doubt if Reason’s one Hispanic reader is going to be taken in.

    1. Alan Vanneman|6.11.14 @ 11:30AM|#
      “It’s amusing to watch libertarians try to convince their readers that Obama is the bad guy when it comes to immigration”

      It’s amusing to watch Obots find excuses for Obo out of thin air, too.

      1. I get a mental image of this guy, only saying “Obama” instead of “Britney”.

    2. It’s more amusing to see how many people don’t give a shit what you think, Arthur Conan Dumbass.

    3. Reason is famous for praising Republicans on immigration.

    4. One can never point out Obama’s hypocrisy; it makes Alan V. sad.

    5. Hey Alan, maybe you can go review Moscow on the Hudson for us and discuss how it’s about illegal immigration. Your review can’t possibly be any stupider than your comments. Probably. OK, I’m not going to guarantee that.

    6. Yeah, if only the President was in charge of DHS.

  2. Did I hear it correctly this morning: Ann Coulter claiming, on Fox & Friends, that 20% of young black men voted against Obama in 2012 because his immigration policies were bringing in competition for “their” jobs? If so, doesn’t that mean that 99.9% of all other blacks voted for Obama? Maybe in certain Philadelphia precincts, but that seems improbable…as does Coulter’s “facts.”

    1. According to Pew, Obama’s support from young black men in 2012 was, in fact, 80%, with 19% voting for Romney.…..ered-more/

      Takes some scrolling, but its in there. As to why they didn’t vote for him, I couldn’t say.

      1. If that’s true, it’s vastly more shocking than even the Cantor upset.

  3. Anti-immigration advocates

    Wow. Brat wants zero immigration? News to me.

    1. Same. Where does it say that?

      1. He’s “anti-immigration”, right? Not anti-amnesty, anti-crony immigration policy, anti-arbitrary enforcement.

        Just anti-immigration. Opposed to all immigration, period, full stop.

        1. According to?

          1. Anti-anything, with no qualifiers, means you are opposed to it without qualification, yes?

            So the answer to your question “according to who” would be “according to the English language”.

            Its not “anti-illegal immigration”. Its not “anti-burden on the public fisc immigration”. Its presented as a total opposition to any and all immigration, period.

            Maybe that’s not what is meant, but that’s certainly what is said.

            1. I said anti-immigration groups were using Brat’s victory to draw conclusions about immigration reform, not that Brat is anti-immigrant. He may well be (arguing that immigration is bad for jerbs is not an argument that can be applied only to illegal immigration), but when it comes to the actual issue of immigration reform David Brat is a non-factor.

              1. Fair point as to Brat (although I’m willing to bet that, if he hasn’t already been, he will be described as “anti-immigration” by Reason).

                But are any of these groups fairly described as “anti-immigration”?

      2. Brat fails to change the color of the Open Borders Libertarian Litmus Paper.

  4. “Some Pro-Immigration Groups Still Giving President Obama a Free Pass”
    So is every Obot in the world.
    There are people stupid enough to think the lying bastard somehow ‘can’t get out of BOOOOOOOOOOOSH’s war!’

  5. Huh. It’s almost like leftist immigration groups are more interested in furthering leftist politics than they are in furthering immigration. Who woulda thunk it?

    1. Wayback machine, circa Clinton’s second term:

      It’s almost like leftist immigration feminist groups are more interested in furthering leftist politics than they are in furthering immigration women’s rights.

  6. Look, pro-immigration groups; Obama has a lot on his plate and he probably hasn’t read about the predicament of immigrants in his morning paper yet. Give him some time to have a flax seed muffin (courtesy of the Wookiee), and then take a dump so he can read his paper. Then maybe he’ll pay attention to you.

    1. So immigration “policy” is contingent not only on O reading the paper but also the regularity of him pinching off a loaf?

      1. *begins praying to Gaia for presidential constipation*

    2. Episiarch|6.11.14 @ 11:45AM|#
      “Look, pro-immigration groups; Obama has a lot on his plate and he probably hasn’t read about the predicament of immigrants in his morning paper yet.”

      Yes, between advising the photoger on which is his best side, trying to figger out what “deserter” means, trying to come up with some new misdirection to keep the VA out of the news, he’s really busy.

  7. I’m personally know the leader of a local immigrant rights organization and she gets the vapors whenever the Lightworker’s name comes up. All criticism on immigration matters are to be leveled at Team Red and Team Red only in her mind. She cannot overcome the idea that if we could just get rid of those pesky congressional Republicans, we could really fix our immigration problems. It’s all about team and principals and nothing to do with results.

    1. “All criticism on immigration matters are to be leveled at Team Red and Team Red only in her mind.”

      See AV’s arm-wavng above.

    2. If an R was President, she would be pitching fits over this:

      A tidal wave of illegal immigrants along the U.S.-Mexico border has caused federal housing and processing facilities to become overwhelmed and overcrowded.…..ed-By-Food

      Shades of post-Katrina New Orleans, only completely self-inflicted, no natural disaster necessary.

  8. The deportation thing is a persistent myth. Do your research, Ed.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.