Nondiscretionary duty to control immigration under the immigration and nationality law. Specifically, the courts said we are not aware and have difficulty conceiving any standards for determining whether immigration control efforts by congress are constitutionally adequate. Why . Because theres an interpretation of the law and an administrative component of the law. Likewise, in heckler vs. Chainy the courts said an agencys decision not to take Enforcement Actions is unreviewable under the act because the court has no workable standard against which the judge the agencys exercise discretion. The president of the United States is instructing and giving guidance to administrative agencies who will make decisions accordingly to the framework of making sure that those who are felons are out but families are not. If you want to stop human trafficking, if you want to have a conscience in this nation, if you want to protect the vulnerable, if you want to keep young people whose bright eyes is
Made substantial that we have one pointed peaks the american its on the ground in afghanistan over 1000. By the end of this year over 10000 and that is part of a trend that at the end of 2016 we will have our military personal act into the embassy. The kind of fulfillment to wind down in to wind down at a very responsible way. Last week the administration and you took about great pains to talk about executive actions. There has been a tremendous amounts of Fact Checking at the washington post. Understanding it is preference that george bush take action not nearly as statistically represented by this administration. Will you either retract that or stop using that in the future . I will not, major. The fact of the matter is the Bush Administration to take an executive action and did have an impact on 1. 5 Million People living in this country and that is about 40 of the population at the time. That has beening reported by the Associated Press, New York Times and the Congressional Researc
Guest they are here, working, and it would be in our interest as a country to bring them online. They need to learn english and pay a fine and pay taxes, which will help contribute to the economy and solidify programs like Social Security and medicare. I think these are all net benefits for why we should allow them to work their way into the country legally. There is no way we will round everybody up and throw them out of the country. That makes no sense. There is no way to do that and we shouldnt. The reality is they are here, and what will we do to resolve this situation . We need to sit down and have a thoughtful discussion about that. You need to learn the language and pay a fine for violating the law, and start paying taxes. If you do that, you will now be a contributing member of society and over several years, you start achieving some of those objectives, come into the country, welcome to america. Host new jersey, democrats line. Caller i am concerned about income inequality, a
Record to reflect the views of mr. Van hollen earlier about not having amendments where we can fully discuss in the house the twoyear funding for the syrian rebel army, and also to make sure that we do not have combat troops actively engaged in iraq. But, mr. Speaker, i am rising right now to strongly state my deep disappointment in a version of the Southeast Arizona Land Exchange act that was included in the National Defense authorization. Heres the National Defense authorization bill, and in here are some land bills. Now, one of the land bills in particular that have been included in here is extremely controversial and it is nongermane and will lead to the destruction of sacred sites for two major tribal nations in our country. And when it does that, when it destroys these sacred sites, it benefits a foreignowned Mining Company with troubling ties to the government of iran. Id like to submit for the record a long list of tribal organizations and other groups who oppose this proposal
Can work with on a comprehensive solution legislatively. Thank you, mr. Secretary. I yield back. The chair recognizes mr. Meehan. Thank you, chairman, and secretary. I have a great deal of respect for you but i have some fundamental disagreements with a couple of the points that were made. You are the one who said somehow somebody what you are doing is creating an opportunity for them to be lawfully in the country. I think it is a unquestioned point that as the law stands today, anybody who illegally enters the United States is a deportable alien. What has happened by this directive is the president has stepped into the authority of determine if under the existing law you have identified somebody who will lawfully be here so long as they , using prosecutorial discretion, they wont be do for did wont be deported as long as they arent a threat to Public Safety or Border Security. How can you create a class of people who are beyond prosecution and not be violating the constitutional separ