“Barack Obama’s disdain for the slow, grinding mechanisms of government has become unmistakable of late” begins today’s editorial by the editors of National Review that examines the mass amnesty edict promised by the Obama administration by the end of the summer.
After noting that various possible versions of the anticipated edict would give permission to work to “anywhere from 3 to 6 million people,” the editors write: “…any unilateral action of this magnitude and type would be unprecedented.” The editorial comments on problems that would arise from a mass amnesty edict such as fraud and the overwhelming of “an already inundated system,” then continues:
“The problem, though, is finally one of constitutional order. Is Congress — and, through it, the electorate — responsible for the laws governing America’s borders? Or does one man get to decide who may enter and work in the United States? The assumption by the president of the ability to unilaterally welcome or reject migrants is a rank violation of the separation of powers. The president would no longer be enforcing existing law; he would be writing it anew at will on a scale heretofore unimagined.”
Posted 7/29/14 by Margaret Hull