WhatFinger


Obama's new Presidential proclamation on Immigration:

America’s version of Britain’s Ban on Michael Savage



Our immigration system is broken and has been broken for quite some time. Congress does not seem interested in fixing it because immigrants inflate voting rolls and bolster re-election chances. President Obama wants to build a "new 21st century immigration system that meets our nation's important economic and security needs." It would be nice to know the specifics of our very important economic and security needs.
"In his State of the Union Address, the President laid out his vision for winning the future." I am not sure what "winning the future" means, but it must be important since he repeats it enough. Apparently, in order to win, "we must out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world, and fixing our immigration system plays an important part" in this plan. According to the White House briefing, we cannot thrive unless we restore responsibility and accountability to the immigration system. Since illegal aliens of all nationalities come in day and night unchecked, there must be little to no responsibility and accountability left from years ago when the U.S. had safe borders. Presidents issue from time to time Executive Orders and Proclamations. President Obama issued 128 proclamations so far. A presidential proclamation is "an instrument that states a condition, declares a law and requires obedience, recognizes an event, or triggers the implementation of a law (by recognizing that the circumstances in law have been realized)" (Cooper 2002, 116).

Support Canada Free Press


A president proclaims a condition that becomes legally binding or an economic reality or truth. Such a proclamation has the power of law just as executive orders do. Executive orders are addressed to those inside the government. Proclamations are issued to those outside of government. A proclamation has administrative weight because it is authorized by Congress as "delegated unilateral powers." Proclamations are seen as more ceremonial or symbolic in nature and thus impractical presidential means of policy-making. However, because proclamations have legal weight, they are important means of presidential governance. On August 4, 2011, President Obama issued the Presidential Proclamation, "Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons Who Participate in Serious Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Violations and Other Abuses." Jumping a border fence illegally seems like criminal abuse and a violation to me but they are considered "undocumented workers." This proclamation determined that "it is in the interest of the United States to take action to restrict the international travel and to suspend the entry into the United States as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of certain persons who have engaged in the acts outlined in section 1 of this proclamation." Section 1, part b, suspends the entry into the United States as immigrants and nonimmigrants of aliens who "planned, ordered, assisted, aided and abetted, committed or otherwise participated in, including through command responsibility, war crimes, crimes against humanity or other serious violations of human rights, or who attempted or conspired to do so." I do not think many Americans would find fault with this decision. Section 1, part a, suspends the entry into the United States as immigrants and nonimmigrants of aliens who "planned, ordered, assisted, aided and abetted, committed or otherwise participated in, including through command responsibility, widespread or systematic violence against any civilian population based in whole or in part on race, color, descent, sex, disability, membership in an indigenous group, language, religion, political opinion, national origin, ethnicity, membership in a particular social group, or sexual orientation, or gender identity, or who attempted or conspired to do so." This is such a broad definition that it can potentially include most aliens or people who are allegedly involved in "hate crimes." I chose the word allegedly because there is no due process, the Secretary of State or her designee has sole discretion to identify persons covered by Section 1 of the proclamation, "pursuant to such standards and procedures as the Secretary may establish." This definitely brings to mind the plight of Michael Savage who was banned from Britain by the Home Secretary for using inflammatory rhetoric on his 15-year-old talk radio show. Without definitive evidence that he stoked violence and without due process, he woke up one morning to find his name lumped in with murderers, torturers, and other unsavory criminals from across the globe. I am not sure Dr. Savage actually had plans to visit Britain. As a free citizen, he should have the option to go if he so chooses, unimpeded by a unilateral decision made by a leftist government whose goals and fundamental ideas he opposes. Britain and London are glowing with fires set by looting communist-indoctrinated thugs, the result of years of multiculturalist delinquency, political correctness, emasculation of the law, and tolerance promoting the destruction of its own culture and people, while welcoming invading hordes who relish in planning its demise with the help of a very generous welfare state. Why would anyone want to go visit Britain anymore? Perhaps the cuisine? As the old song goes, "There's no England anymore." Our Secretary of State implements the August 4, 2011 proclamation in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security. The proclamation stays in effect until the Secretary of State determines that it is no longer necessary. This proclamation looks like the American version of the British law that banned Michael Savage from the United Kingdom. Section 6 of the proclamation says that entry cannot be suspended based "solely on an alien's ideology, opinions, or beliefs, or based solely on expression that would be considered protected under U.S. interpretation of international agreements to which the U.S. is a party." The U.S. has limitless authority to admit or suspend entry of particular individuals under the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) or under any other provisions of U.S. law." What will be the unintended consequences to this proclamation in the near future? How many individuals will be affected by the whims of two people, and why is it necessary when nefarious aliens enter the U.S. illegally anyway, without border and custom officials' entry approval?


View Comments

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh -- Bio and Archives

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh, Ileana Writes is a freelance writer, author, radio commentator, and speaker. Her books, “Echoes of Communism”, “Liberty on Life Support” and “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy,” “Communism 2.0: 25 Years Later” are available at Amazon in paperback and Kindle.


Sponsored