Nebraska AG defines reason to scrap DACA protection

Attorney General Doug Peterson on Tuesday outlined his opposition to DACA protections for immigrant youths in more detail in the wake of a letter from 20 state senators urging him to change his position.

"I pledged to take an oath to uphold the Constitution," Peterson wrote in a statement reaffirming his support for a request that the Trump administration reverse its decision to allow so-called DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival) youths to retain legal presence in the United States.

"The letter did not call for immediate removal of any DACA-affected persons," Peterson noted.


Bipartisan bills have been introduced in both the Senate and the House to provide a pathway for DACA youths to obtain legal residence in the United States and ultimately work toward citizenship.

Asked for his position on the legislation, Rep. Jeff Fortenberry said Congress needs to deal with immigration policy in a more comprehensive way, dealing with border security, law enforcement, humanitarian considerations and foreign policy issues.

"There is significant policy action in each of these areas, which creates the conditions for the rightful discussion about how young people can remain within the law," the 1st District congressman said in a written statement.

"A proper immigration policy depends upon both order and justice," he said.

Both Sens. Deb Fischer and Ben Sasse declined comment in response to an earlier request for their views on the Senate bill.

https://www.google.com/amp/journalst...83d1e.amp.html

Why didn't these Ag's sue in 2012 if they were so concerned? Interesting to see how both senators from Nebraska refused to comment on the dream act bills.

I did some research and apparently both of the senators from Nebraska are hardliners. The female senator voted against CIR in 2013. I found this interesting quote from Chuck Grassley in this article from March. He is also a hardliner on immigration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“My first concern is securing the border and making sure that we keep dangerous people out of this country,” Fischer said. “I view it as national security.”

Grassley, who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee, outlined the steps needed before Congress can consider legislation dealing with those already in the country illegally.

Those steps include securing the border with both physical and virtual measures, and bolstering the border patrol. He also called for addressing visa overstays and “interior enforcement.”

“Which the president is vigorously doing now, but Obama did not do it — getting people that are criminal aliens out of the country,” Grassley told reporters last week.

He said the government has to demonstrate it is serious about enforcing immigration laws.

“We’ve been telling people for 20 years we’re going to secure the border, and there was some actions taken that kind of (we) thought we were securing the border, but it’s obvious we didn’t,” he said. “So we’ve lost credibility.”

He said he’s made that point to the Trump administration. But he also added that he has no objection if Trump allows Obama’s DACA approach to continue.

“He’s going to let that stand, and I don’t think he’s going to have a lot of fuss about it,” Grassley said.

Overall, he supports Trump’s efforts to step up immigration enforcement.

“We’re talking about just enforcing the law,” Grassley said.

http://www.omaha.com/news/nation/neb...bd8779762.html

He said he’s made that point to the Trump administration. But he also added that he has no objection if Trump allows Obama’s DACA approach to continue.

Never mind.

*

http://neappleseed.org/blog/22759

DACA is constitutional. Period.

I wouldn't go as far as to call it constitutional.