Even the Washington Post Warns that Obama's Unilateral Action on Immigration Sets a Very Dangerous Precedent

I am an open borders kind of guy. In general, if you've got the gumption to get here, then you've got what it takes to be an American. Congress should long ago have adopted legislation that would enable undocumented immigrants to get on the path toward citizenship.
That being said, what President Obama is about to do tonight with regard to immigration is very dangerous to our constitutional order. And I am not alone in thinking so. Earlier this week, the editorial board of the Washington Post warned the president and the progressive peanut gallery of the danger inherent in trying to set immigration policy via fiat. The Post op-ed, "In Mr. Obama's own words, acting alone is 'not how our democracy functions'," the editorial board sketched out this future scenario:
It is 2017. Newly elected President Ted Cruz (R) insists he has won a mandate to repeal Obamacare. The Senate, narrowly back in Democratic hands, disagrees. Mr. Cruz instructs the Internal Revenue Service not to collect a fine from anyone who opts out of the individual mandate to buy health insurance, thereby neutering a key element of the program. It is a matter of prosecutorial discretion, Mr. Cruz explains; tax cheats are defrauding the government of billions, and he wants the IRS to concentrate on them. Of course, he is willing to modify his order as soon as Congress agrees to fix what he considers a "broken" health system.
That is not a perfect analogy to Mr. Obama's proposed action on immigration. But it captures the unilateral spirit that Mr. Obama seems to have embraced since Republicans swept to victory in the midterm elections.
Giving presidents the notion that they can pick and choose (discretion) which laws to enforce destroys the rule of law and leads toward tyranny.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
It is 2017. Newly elected President Ted Cruz (R) insists he has won a mandate to repeal Obamacare. The Senate, narrowly back in Democratic hands, disagrees. Mr. Cruz instructs the Internal Revenue Service not to collect a fine from anyone who opts out of the individual mandate to buy health insurance, thereby neutering a key element of the program.
Yeah, but that's Ted Cruz. We're talking about Barack Obama. It's totally different.
When he unilaterally fires everyone in a long list of Federal Agencies and Departments, cuts taxes, etc... I will have some very mixed feelings.
Once we are electing Dictators, violence is on the table to get our guy elected. Ask the Romans.
Once you're electing* dictators, violence is the only way to get your guy elected.
* He who counts the votes has the power.
Until the vote counters are killed or counting at gunpoint.
In general, if you've got the gumption to get here, then you've got what it takes to be an American.
"You're a great American, Mohammed Atta."
Too soon
MM: Really? For more background, see my article "Criminal Immigrants?"
A lot of great Americans have blown things up.
Why thankee very much, BS A!
*takes slight bow*
It's not Obama's fault that Congress has allowed itself to wither and die. Or that the Supreme Court has taken to the notion it should defer to the other branches and not the Constitution.
Well I mean, what's he left with? Clearly, the mid-terms prove that democracy failed.
Thrice was he offered a kingly crown, and thrice did he refuse it. Obama is an honorable man.
I got 30 denarii it was the crowd's bad breath that made him wave it away...
/Casca
And all of that is a product of bipartisanship. Ain't it a great thing.
Is it Obama's fault that Senator Obama never proposed an immigration reform bill? Or President Obama's fault that he forgot to ask Congress for anything when his party was in total control for 2 years?
Of course not!
They tried, and were blocked by filibuster.
Really? What bill was that? The only immigration bill that was filibustered during 2009-2010, to my knowledge, was the DREAM Act, and the Dems helped filibuster that one. Obama didn't advocate for or get dems to introduce any comprehensive reform. The WaPo Fact Checker seems to agree with me. Do you have a cite to the contrary.
Even the Washington Post Warns that Obama's Unilateral Action on Immigration Sets a Very Dangerous Precedent.
"The Republicans might use it!"
SDY: That should worry you too.
Oh, it does. I'm just a little suspicious whether WaPo is acting in good faith.
Made the WaPo editorial board wake up screaming in the night...
The are taking the right stand, partially for the right reason - much better than I could have hoped for, I guess.
And its taken them how long to understand the iron law of politics?
Lets see....WaPo founded in 1877, so that would make it 137 years.
All part of Barack Obama's fundamental transformation of America into a Third World banana republic - complete with many millions of Latino peasants.
The problem is that doing it in this way is likely to get those peasants deported by the next President and sour the country on importing anymore ever again.
"Importing" probably isn't the best term to use. In any case, I think we should make our best effort to encourage the free movement of labor.
For more than 40 years, Guatemala has an explicitly libertarian university, complete with the "Ludwig von Mises Library", "Henry Hazlitt Center", "Center for the Study of Capitalism ", and busts of Hayek and von Mises
I wouldn't mind some of their alumni here.
I wish I knew Spanish and could have studied there...
HM: I've been there - it's awesome. Sadly, the government is massively corrupt.
complete with many millions of Latino peasants.
It would be one thing if we really needed them, but as everyone knows, the percentage of Americans who are working in the lowest it has been in a generation.
Let some of the bums on unemployment gets off their lazy fucking asses and work if companies need employees so damn much.
The problem again not being the boarder, but the fact that we bastardized natural laws to the point where not illegal means free stolen money
people should be allowed to starve and die if they do not compete for resources, welfare perpetuates genetic defects and laziness while adding an attraction for others to come and game the system so they too can be paid for being born useless.
some may call me heartless but i contend that they are the ones who are heartless as they consign generations of children to foot the bill for them to feel good about themselves for being SJWs.
basically i dont care where you live so long as I dont have to foot the bill against my will
I don't think "think of the precedent this could set for a future Republican president/Congress" works as an argument. Republicans are going to do whatever they damn well want and aren't going to consult past Democrats for permission. This crop threatened global recession and the destruction of the US's economic reputation because they didn't get their way on a piece of domestic legislation. Were they checking history on that one?
Instructions
Place the sugar cube (or 1/2 teaspoon loose sugar) in an Old-Fashioned glass. Wet it down with 2 or 3 dashes of Angostura bitters and a short splash of water or club soda. Crush the sugar with a wooden muddler. Rotate the glass so that the sugar grains and bitters give it a lining. Add a large ice cube. Pour in the rye (or bourbon). Serve with a stirring rod.
A message to Tony.
So, autistic is the new retard. Good to know.
You mean like when the dem congress repeatedly shut down the government during the Reagan administration to try to get him to sign legislation they wanted?
Democracies become very dangerous places to live in when people at large simply assume that the full force of state apparatus will be used without restraint against them once the other side gets into power. Right now, outside of dipshits like Tony and his counterparts on the right (as well as some over-cynical libertarians), this is not truly the case. Unfortunately, this type of EO and abandonment of the legislature (among other things) are exactly what confirm that this country is moving towards that model of venemous democracy -- and once it gets there, Katie bar the door. As many of the Latin American republics have learned, there really isn't a good way to get your democracy back after this outside of either severe punishment of anyone in politics who does this, or a dictator who gets the whole country to unify against him (thus providing a basis for temperance when the dictator leaves).
^^THIS^^
Obama was for the sequester before he was against it.
Hey, he was ELECTED. That means he can do any goddam thing he wants, you racists.