The unconstitutional Obama executive order known as DACA was rescinded by the Trump DOJ on September 5. Even as the courageous and unassuming A.G. Jeff Sessions made the announcement, thousands of tweets painted him as a hood-donning white-supremacist Russian agent. Nancy Pelosi effectively called for more public displays of Antifa violence across the fruited plain, declaring President Trump’s decision a “deeply shameful act of political cowardice and a despicable assault on innocent young people” whom she deemed, en masse, “bright” and “patriotic.” In the Cultural Marxist calculus, to advocate for the deportation of illegal aliens is to participate in the “assault on innocent young people,” and mace in the face is the appropriate response.
There are unavoidable and antinomian assumptions barely hidden behind the rhetoric of those who insist that it is inhumane, barbaric, and monstrous to deport a member of the caste we now refer to as “Dreamers”—Newspeak for individuals who “entered” the United States illegally as “children.” President Obama’s “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” determined that “childhood” meant “under the age of 16.” Of course, studies have shown that everyone who is over the age of 16 was once under the age of 16, for a period of roughly 16 years, and that each of them was the product of a biological male and female, commonly known as “parents,” whose ideas and actions have significant consequences pertaining to the lives and wellbeing of their children. Since every illegal alien was once a child, and a 42-year-old does not evoke the sympathy that a “young person” does, Obama delimited the Dreamers further by requiring that they be under 31 years of age as of June 15, 2012, the day DACA was issued. The dreams of, say, 32-year-old illegals were deemed unworthy of fulfillment; they “arrived” too soon.
Further limitations came via Obama’s famous pen in terms of crimes committed by these childhood arrivals. Any of them who had been convicted of a felony, or of three or more misdemeanors, or of one DUI could not legally apply. Of course, that only excluded felons and drunk drivers from the legal benefits DACA provided; it did not automatically deport them.
But DACA did not make its beneficiaries “resident aliens,” either. That designation applied only to green-card holders, and Obama/DACA made it clear that the Dreamers were not being granted legal status. Instead, what they received was a tertium quid absurdity: a not-illegal, yet also not-legal, status. (However, “you should instead consider yourself a resident alien for tax purposes,” TurboTax helpfully informed them, having plumbed the depths of the tax code.) And the non-nonresident yet also not-resident alien status they were given was temporary, good only for two years. So the arriving-in-childhood Dreamers, whose dreams it would be Hitleresque to deny, were forced by Obama to reapply as often as, say, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives does for his job.
Even in Obama’s Magic Kingdom, there was such a thing as a “former Dreamer.” Since DACA Day, Obama deported an average of seven former DACA beneficiaries per month, who had lost “their protected status because of criminal behavior,” according to the Los Angeles Times. The point of that article was to underscore the ruthless savagery of President Trump, who one quarter into his first year in office was averaging 43 ex-Dreamer deportations per month within the confines of DACA, which he could have rescinded on Day One of his presidency. No matter: Seven was acceptable; 43 is Nazi.
The Dreamer Class now registers over 800,000 souls. That is more than the number of citizens of the state of Wyoming, or Vermont, or Alaska, or North Dakota. How could this not have a profound effect on jobs and wages, and on state budgets and federally funded social entitlements? Is it really “racist” to point out the possibility of U.S. citizens losing out to DACA college applicants admitted under affirmative action?
Such reasoning resonates only with those who believe that borders have a moral right to exist, that citizenship still means something, and that children must sometimes face the negative consequences of their parents’ actions. The state does not own children, even if they came to the United States under the influence of illegal-alien parents. U.S. citizens who are also fathers are routinely arrested, convicted of crimes, and sent to jail, thrusting their children into poverty. Should fatherhood exempt criminals from jail sentences?
Or is it monstrous to consider crossing the border illegally (trespassing), forging documents (lying to civil authorities), and surreptitiously enjoying taxpayer largesse (stealing) as crimes? What mitigates these offenses, transforming them into virtues?
The answer, for the American liberal, is having a dream. “A dream is a wish your heart makes,” sang Walt Disney’s Cinderella in 1950. “Whatever you wish for, you keep.” The Baby Boomers effectively made a Disney song their credo, taught it to their children, and created the bipartisan dreamworld in which we now live.
Cinderella would be proud of Lindsey Graham’s DREAM Act of 2017, which has now been thrust into the spotlight with the rescinding of DACA. Cosponsored by fellow Republicans Jeff Flake and Lisa Murkowski, along with Democrats Dick Durbin, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, and Jeff Sessions’ biggest fan, Kamala Harris, it would offer amnesty to the Dreamers, placing them on the infamous “path to citizenship” and Democratic voter registration.
Unencumbered by the will to say no to anyone who is connected somehow to his own inner child, the legislation will inspire a new generation of Third Worlders to dream of “arrival,” affirmative action, and amnesty. The parents of the current generation of illegals were inspired by Ronald Reagan’s unconstitutional “Family Fairness” deferred-action program, whose benefits were made permanent by the Immigration Act of 1990, which was introduced by Ted Kennedy and signed by George H.W. Bush. The cycle continues. We look the other way while a new generation of illegal aliens grows by hundreds of thousands until it is too large to ignore, turn them into a class of welfare-seeking indentured servants through “deferred action,” then remind ourselves that we are ashamed that we are “racists” who own slaves and manumit them.
How, apart from undeferred and unpleasant “action,” will it ever stop?