Charles Kuck: President Obama: Publish the DAPA and Extended DACA Regulations - Page 2

Charles Kuck is not a random lawyer.He is one of the best immigration lawyers in the country.


PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES
Mr. Kuck is the immediate past National President of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA). He has served on the National Executive Committee of AILA for seven years. Previously, Mr. Kuck served on the Board of Governors of AILA for six years. Three of those years he was one of 21 elected members of the National Board of Governors, two of those years he spent as Chair of the Atlanta Chapter, and he served for one year as the National Chair of the Young Lawyers Division. He previously served as Chair of AILAs USCIS Headquarters Liaison Committee and Chair of AILAs Consumer Protection Committee, and has served on various other National Liaison Committees for AILA. Additionally, Mr. Kuck is also the Editor-in-Chief of The AILA Litigation Toolbox, a hands-on approach to litigating immigration issues.

Mr. Kuck is a Founding Fellow of the Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers (ABIL). Mr Kuck serves on the International Board for the J. Rueben Clark Law Society, and is a member and currently serves as its President of the Board of Governors of the Georgia Asylum Immigration Network (GAIN). Mr. Kuck also served for seven years on the Board of Directors of the Latin American Association. Since 1999, he has taught both the Introductory and Advanced Immigration Law Seminars at the University of Georgias School of Law as an Adjunct Professor of Law. He is currently a part of the group of attorneys in Georgia litigating against the HB-87 law.

So according to Charles Kuck, Charles Kuck is one of the best immigration attorney's in the US? got it. I'm not saying he's not a good lawyer but that's just one man's opinion. Why aren't all the other immigration lawyers jumping on this band wagon if it's as simple as Obama just filling out a registry? Why didn't the 5th circuit judge who was in favor of staying the injunction say "If the POTUS were to simply add this to the registry, it would likely resolve the entire issue and everybody could go home"?

You guys are making it sound like Obama's sole reason for pursuing this case is he doesn't want to eat the Republican's shit and or this is some sort of conspiracy to NOT get it done. That sounds like crazy talk to me. I'm not a lawyer but neither is anybody else here.

Nonetheless going back to basic critical thinking, there are three measures to weight an argument: ethos, pathos and logos. That is credibility, emotion and logic.

It is not a little thing to be or have been the president of the American Association of Lawyers. Being a member of AILA is the basic rule of thumb most organizations teach humble ppl to look for when looking for an immigration lawyer. Sometimes news article from some John Two Cents are posted demonizing one immigrant to use as an excuse to deny everyone else. And every one jumps into that bandwagon without considering who is telling the story and whether it is a credible source to begin with.

Being an activist lawyer is not the same thing as an immigration lawyer. One is more concerned with policy and the one about implementing it. I wasn't aware this is what it took to implement DACA. I though it was welcomed with open arms, a mule and four acres. Probably most immigration lawyers aren't aware either. They don't have the time to know how it got there, only how can they use it properly for their clients.

Why most organizations are not jumping into this? They probably are but they are not expressing this views to us, they are going directly with their contacts in the White House to express some comments. Having a Republican in any seat affects them too.

In something completely unrelated but I hope it helps. The Modern Supply and Demand graph has an employment line. It is very easy to see it and say, oh, it moved to the left one point and that's interesting. Just remember, those are thousands of ppl losing their jobs. That is creating suffering and pain. It is very easy to objectify people even by activists who are on our side. I dunno. I feel like I'm rambling at this point, so I'm gonna stop.

A federal judge, a circuit court, and immigration law professionals have stated the roadblock to DAPA and extended DACA is the lack of a publication, comment period in the federal register.

The evidence that a publish, comment period was launched for DACA 2012 is in the federal register.

What part of this is subjective??

What percentage of law professionals are saying this? So far I hear only one or two who are again giving their opinion. As long as we're being conspiracy theorists, I'd say it's partially to drum up business and add traffic to their websites. Sure their opinions are based on their knowledge of the law, but then the people who say Obama is breaking the law by executive action (like Ted Cruz) are also lawyers so just the fact that they happen to be lawyers doesn't mean they are right one way or another.

And again you keep mentioning the 2012 DACA - that was already enacted so whatever they did for that after the fact doesn't mean that it would work for this particular case.

If tomorrow or a month from now Obama adds this to the federal register and all of a sudden the 5th circuit magically says "oh well, that's all we were waiting for Mr. President!" and Hanen comes out and says "That's all I ever wanted! Welcome to America old Dreamers and old parents!" I'll eat my words, but I think a lot of you armchair immigration lawyers and federal judges are simplifying this too much.

I refuse to believe they would have went to all the trouble to implement this if they secretly wished for this to fail as some people seem to think. The opposition could have easily called their bluff if that were the case. I agree that they seriously underestimated the legal challenges that would occur, but they aren't intentionally causing this to fail. The OP article states that the programs implantation has failed when in fact it has been delayed but not failed because the case is not settled.

I agree that it's just one lawyer's opinion. Furthermore there are also lawyers who think there were good legal reasons not to publish the rule: https://verdict.justia.com/2015/02/2...on-immigration.

Don't forget over 100 immigration lawyers signed an amicus brief stating the program was legal. It's not just the white house lawyers that think the program is legal.

A conspiracy, according to the dictionary is a secret plan by a group to harm others or break the law. If the conclusion of the argument is that there is a conspiracy to harm undocumented immigrants to gain political points. It is a childish argument. I do not believe that is what we are debating though.

Neither that Obama is a Master Manipulator in a Game of Thrones like scenario where he has all the movements of the Republican Party so calculated that he got to this point and sat on that uncomfortable chair and said, "finally, I have all that I want."

Not all immigration lawyers are equal. Some are better than others. Some do Constitutional Law and others Dog bites. Would I consider the opinion of Ted Cruz above the one of the guy who was the President of the American Association of Immigration Lawyers? Nope. The same way you would take the advice of a Neurologist for things relating to the brain as opposed to a MD.

Also, the comment made by Justia is the same we had in the past. In that case, I agreed, it would take years for the process to allow us to get a work permit. However, he is not recommending that. He is asking for something different used to get the original DACA going before it was blocked on the courts.

Being analytical is part of what is going on. Obama, the Republican and Democrat Parties and most organizations have to think of things other than immediate harm. This is politics.

No one is saying this is a "conspiracy" - simply that publishing regulations would allow you to apply for DAPA or extended DACA while the litigation runs its course. It's an available option that people don't seem to want to take. Odd.

Is the DOJ going to publish it for July 10th?

You're trolling, right?