Executive Order Document to secure the border

If immigration is an invasion and should be prevented, all immigrants and decendents of immigrants should be forced to leave the country. That includes some 90% of the population.

Not so sure about the article 4 part. I agree with you zippy.
But article 1 section 8 deals with immigration(uniform naturalization), it's a congressional power and the president can direct the executive branch in such a way as to how they will carry out the law.
 
Last edited:
If you see anything illegal ,tell me,because I read the entire document and have not seen anything unconstitutional in it.
This is actually one of the things that a president is supposed to do. So why are people up in arms acting as if this is something they never heard of before ? I'm tired of mexicans,chinese,middle eastern,english, etc. whatever whoever they are from wherever who came here illegally crying because they broke laws. If I hopped over to canada and illegally avoided becoming a resident or citizen through legal means you bet I would expect the law to come down on me....and its not smart to do that because then my chance of ever moving there would be screwed over,so why do foreigners usually think they can take advantage of the united states?

There is a lot here, so I will be cursory, but hopefully sufficient for less stringent purposes.



"The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 25, 2017
Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements

EXECUTIVE ORDER

- - - - - - -

BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT IMPROVEMENTS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) (INA), the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Public Law 109 367) (Secure Fence Act), and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (Public Law 104 208 Div. C) (IIRIRA), and in order to ensure the safety and territorial integrity of the United States as well as to ensure that the Nation's immigration laws are faithfully executed, I hereby order as follows:

Nothing particularly noteworthy there.

Section 1. Purpose. Border security is critically important to the national security of the United States. Aliens who illegally enter the United States without inspection or admission present a significant threat to national security and public safety. Such aliens have not been identified or inspected by Federal immigration officers to determine their admissibility to the United States. The recent surge of illegal immigration at the southern border with Mexico has placed a significant strain on Federal resources and overwhelmed agencies charged with border security and immigration enforcement, as well as the local communities into which many of the aliens are placed.

Careless wording. SOME such people such threats, but not all. All pose POTENTIAL threats. Either alternative wording would be acceptable.

Transnational criminal organizations operate sophisticated drug- and human-trafficking networks and smuggling operations on both sides of the southern border, contributing to a significant increase in violent crime and United States deaths from dangerous drugs. Among those who illegally enter are those who seek to harm Americans through acts of terror or criminal conduct. Continued illegal immigration presents a clear and present danger to the interests of the United States.

I disagree with the implications of the drug-trafficking references; they are bullshit and speak against individual liberty under tacit presumptions that hold no validity in a free land. They are, therefore, anti-liberty no matter how good the intentions.

Federal immigration law both imposes the responsibility and provides the means for the Federal Government, in cooperation with border States, to secure the Nation's southern border. Although Federal immigration law provides a robust framework for Federal-State partnership in enforcing our immigration laws and the Congress has authorized and provided appropriations to secure our borders the Federal Government has failed to discharge this basic sovereign responsibility. The purpose of this order is to direct executive departments and agencies (agencies) to deploy all lawful means to secure the Nation's southern border, to prevent further illegal immigration into the United States, and to repatriate illegal aliens swiftly, consistently, and humanely.

This wording is of a far better construction. I see nothing wrong in this, assuming the basic validity of "government", "law", and so on.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the executive branch to:

(a) secure the southern border of the United States through the immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border, monitored and supported by adequate personnel so as to prevent illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking, and acts of terrorism;

The wall fails miserably. The immigration and terrorism justifications are in themselves valid reasons for taking measures, but the stated measure is no solution. I have no desire to make my country look like 1961 Berlin. Let us not even mention the horrific waste of resources this represents. Put PEOPLE on the border, not walls. Put them there with the right orders and much good would be accomplished with a minimum of the evil. IMO, of course.

(b) detain individuals apprehended on suspicion of violating Federal or State law, including Federal immigration law, pending further proceedings regarding those violations;

Seems broad and vague, but I suppose the details are to be found in "law". Fair enough, all else equal.

(c) expedite determinations of apprehended individuals' claims of eligibility to remain in the United States;

So far as it goes, I would call this very good. There is nothing in the general issue that would demand this, and yet it is included. It certainly speaks well-ish for the intentions. The proof of the pudding shall be in the tasting.

(d) remove promptly those individuals whose legal claims to remain in the United States have been lawfully rejected, after any appropriate civil or criminal sanctions have been imposed; and

(e) cooperate fully with States and local law enforcement in enacting Federal-State partnerships to enforce Federal immigration priorities, as well as State monitoring and detention programs that are consistent with Federal law and do not undermine Federal immigration priorities.

Clean.

Sec. 3. Definitions. (a) "Asylum officer" has the meaning given the term in section 235(b)(1)(E) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)).

(b) "Southern border" shall mean the contiguous land border between the United States and Mexico, including all points of entry.

(c) "Border States" shall mean the States of the United States immediately adjacent to the contiguous land border between the United States and Mexico.

(d) Except as otherwise noted, "the Secretary" shall refer to the Secretary of Homeland Security.

(e) "Wall" shall mean a contiguous, physical wall or other similarly secure, contiguous, and impassable physical barrier.

(f) "Executive department" shall have the meaning given in section 101 of title 5, United States Code.

(g) "Regulations" shall mean any and all Federal rules, regulations, and directives lawfully promulgated by agencies.

(h) "Operational control" shall mean the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.

Aside from the "wall" and "drug" silliness, I nothing here that stands out.
Sec. 4. Physical Security of the Southern Border of the United States. The Secretary shall immediately take the following steps to obtain complete operational control, as determined by the Secretary, of the southern border:

(a) In accordance with existing law, including the Secure Fence Act and IIRIRA, take all appropriate steps to immediately plan, design, and construct a physical wall along the southern border, using appropriate materials and technology to most effectively achieve complete operational control of the southern border;

(b) Identify and, to the extent permitted by law, allocate all sources of Federal funds for the planning, designing, and constructing of a physical wall along the southern border;

(c) Project and develop long-term funding requirements for the wall, including preparing Congressional budget requests for the current and upcoming fiscal years; and

(d) Produce a comprehensive study of the security of the southern border, to be completed within 180 days of this order, that shall include the current state of southern border security, all geophysical and topographical aspects of the southern border, the availability of Federal and State resources necessary to achieve complete operational control of the southern border, and a strategy to obtain and maintain complete operational control of the southern border.

More of same.

Sec. 5. Detention Facilities. (a) The Secretary shall take all appropriate action and allocate all legally available resources to immediately construct, operate, control, or establish contracts to construct, operate, or control facilities to detain aliens at or near the land border with Mexico.

(b) The Secretary shall take all appropriate action and allocate all legally available resources to immediately assign asylum officers to immigration detention facilities for the purpose of accepting asylum referrals and conducting credible fear determinations pursuant to section 235(b)(1) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)) and applicable regulations and reasonable fear determinations pursuant to applicable regulations.

(c) The Attorney General shall take all appropriate action and allocate all legally available resources to immediately assign immigration judges to immigration detention facilities operated or controlled by the Secretary, or operated or controlled pursuant to contract by the Secretary, for the purpose of conducting proceedings authorized under title 8, chapter 12, subchapter II, United States Code.

Don't we already have plenty of "facilities"? Do we really need to build more.I say catch them, give then ineligibles a good beating... nothing severe, just something they will remember, and put them back over the border. :)


Sec. 9. Foreign Aid Reporting Requirements. The head of each executive department and agency shall identify and quantify all sources of direct and indirect Federal aid or assistance to the Government of Mexico on an annual basis over the past five years, including all bilateral and multilateral development aid, economic assistance, humanitarian aid, and military aid. Within 30 days of the date of this order, the head of each executive department and agency shall submit this information to the Secretary of State. Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall submit to the President a consolidated report reflecting the levels of such aid and assistance that has been provided annually, over each of the past five years.

The leverage. I like this part. What is the economic interest worth to the MX economy, plus the foreign aid? I would bet it is more than their idiotic PC politics, meaning the Mexicans are likely to toe the American immigration line, rather than risk gutting their economy when NAFTA gets tossed, high tariffs imposed, and all US companies pull out.

Sec. 10. Federal-State Agreements. It is the policy of the executive branch to empower State and local law enforcement agencies across the country to perform the functions of an immigration officer in the interior of the United States to the maximum extent permitted by law.

(a) In furtherance of this policy, the Secretary shall immediately take appropriate action to engage with the Governors of the States, as well as local officials, for the purpose of preparing to enter into agreements under section 287(g) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1357(g)).

Setting the trap to force states to follow law. This could be really cool, or really bad. Time will tell. Also depends much on what the so-called "law" says. But I am inclined to be on board with making the idiots giving sanctuary to the criminals suffer greatly.

(b) To the extent permitted by law, and with the consent of State or local officials, as appropriate, the Secretary shall take appropriate action, through agreements under section 287(g) of the INA, or otherwise, to authorize State and local law enforcement officials, as the Secretary determines are qualified and appropriate, to perform the functions of immigration officers in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States under the direction and the supervision of the Secretary. Such authorization shall be in addition to, rather than in place of, Federal performance of these duties.

(c) To the extent permitted by law, the Secretary may structure each agreement under section 287(g) of the INA in the manner that provides the most effective model for enforcing Federal immigration laws and obtaining operational control over the border for that jurisdiction.

Sec. 11. Parole, Asylum, and Removal. It is the policy of the executive branch to end the abuse of parole and asylum provisions currently used to prevent the lawful removal of removable aliens.

(a) The Secretary shall immediately take all appropriate action to ensure that the parole and asylum provisions of Federal immigration law are not illegally exploited to prevent the removal of otherwise removable aliens.

(b) The Secretary shall take all appropriate action, including by promulgating any appropriate regulations, to ensure that asylum referrals and credible fear determinations pursuant to section 235(b)(1) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1125(b)(1)) and 8 CFR 208.30, and reasonable fear determinations pursuant to 8 CFR 208.31, are conducted in a manner consistent with the plain language of those provisions.

Nothing overtly troublesome, but the reality turns very much on how all this language is interpreted.

(c) Pursuant to section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I) of the INA, the Secretary shall take appropriate action to apply, in his sole and unreviewable discretion, the provisions of section 235(b)(1)(A)(i) and (ii) of the INA to the aliens designated under section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(II).

May not be illegal, but this bit is very disturbing. "Unreviewable" swings wide the gates to corruption, all good intentions notwithstanding.

(d) The Secretary shall take appropriate action to ensure that parole authority under section 212(d)(5) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) is exercised only on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the plain language of the statute, and in all circumstances only when an individual demonstrates urgent humanitarian reasons or a significant public benefit derived from such parole.

(e) The Secretary shall take appropriate action to require that all Department of Homeland Security personnel are properly trained on the proper application of section 235 of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (8 U.S.C. 1232) and section 462(g)(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g)(2)), to ensure that unaccompanied alien children are properly processed, receive appropriate care and placement while in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security, and, when appropriate, are safely repatriated in accordance with law.

Sec. 12. Authorization to Enter Federal Lands. The Secretary, in conjunction with the Secretary of the Interior and any other heads of agencies as necessary, shall take all appropriate action to:

(a) permit all officers and employees of the United States, as well as all State and local officers as authorized by the Secretary, to have access to all Federal lands as necessary and appropriate to implement this order; and

(b) enable those officers and employees of the United States, as well as all State and local officers as authorized by the Secretary, to perform such actions on Federal lands as the Secretary deems necessary and appropriate to implement this order.

Sec. 13. Priority Enforcement. The Attorney General shall take all appropriate steps to establish prosecution guidelines and allocate appropriate resources to ensure that Federal prosecutors accord a high priority to prosecutions of offenses having a nexus to the southern border.

Sec. 14. Government Transparency. The Secretary shall, on a monthly basis and in a publicly available way, report statistical data on aliens apprehended at or near the southern border using a uniform method of reporting by all Department of Homeland Security components, in a format that is easily understandable by the public.

Sec. 15. Reporting. Except as otherwise provided in this order, the Secretary, within 90 days of the date of this order, and the Attorney General, within 180 days, shall each submit to the President a report on the progress of the directives contained in this order.

Sec. 16. Hiring. The Office of Personnel Management shall take appropriate action as may be necessary to facilitate hiring personnel to implement this order.

Sec. 17. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 25, 2017."

This will play out in accord with interpretation. We won't know until we know.
 
I too read it. I agree with you on this one.

Article I gives the federal government immigration power for citizenship so long as its uniform. If your argument is that congress has no authority for non-uniform immigration laws then you are, possibly correctly, pointing to the unconstitutionality of green cards, refuge status, etc. But if that's where your pointing then the president is doing his job to 'check' congress and this order prevents congress from having non-uniform immigration.

which law did he "make" in this particular case?

i enjoy most everything Amash writes but this is an area I wish he'd explain better. Green card holders aren't US citizens. This directive does deport green card holders either. I know he didn't say that but i wish he was more clear to explain the "ban" for green card holders isn't a ban. It says a green card holder, like all non citizens, may need to go before a judge prior to entry into the country after they are overseas. That judge is to determine the authenticity of the person's documentation prior to letting them enter the country. I sure welcome more Amash quotes if anyone has them so I can better understand his point.

Amash is ignorant on this issue. This is where an originalist/textualist interpration of the u.s. constitution conflicts with the illiberal view which is to interpret the u.s. constitution according to societal "needs". The u.s. constitution itself recognizes that there is such thing as "alien" ,and citizen. That clear distinction itself is so clear that "visa" is obviously NOT a citizen, but a permitted traveler who is not native to the u.s.

Take for instance if the united states of america by theory was in war against country A.......and country A has 10,000 of its citizens inside of the United States holding visas....guess what? that puts the united states at risk . Therefore yes the president has the authority vested in him according to broad powers in the united states constitution to defend nationally the united states borders against foreign and domestic threats. Take for instance all the idiots who are protesting for stuff like amnesty 10 years ago all the way back to the may day marches under the Bush era...and Obama era....lots of illegal mexican immigrants who protested,and many of them who take part are saboteurs to our city ordinances,and state laws, and federal laws.As much as a libertarian would like to argue that this is "authoritarianism"......the founders set it up this way for a reason so that we would never as citizens become the MINORITY with no voice or representation of ourselves.
 
"Change, however, was on the horizon. The Social Wars, or War of the Allies, would alter the status of the allies. While his fellow Romans in the Senate were making further attempts at restricting citizenship for the allied(allies often tribal class,not citizens mostly) communities, the tribune M. Livius Drusus was proposing to grant them full and equal citizenship. In 91 BCE his assassination initiated the Social Wars (91 – 89 BCE) - one of the deadliest in all of Roman history. The Etruscans and Umbrians were threatening to secede. Riots and unrest (even outside the Italian peninsula) soon followed. The Senate told the populace that if these people became citizens they would overrun the city. However, calmer minds prevailed and as a result, full citizenship was finally granted to all people (slaves excluded) in the entire Italian peninsula (at least initially) for those who had not taken up arms against Rome. Later, Julius Caesar, the dictator for life, would extend citizenship beyond Italy and grant it to the people of Spain and Gaul.
(obviously its about power).
The definition of what is was to be Roman was changing; in fact, the idea of what was “Latin” was becoming, as one historian expressed, less ethnic and more political. And, in Rome, many of the old questions arose such as how were the existing institutions to deal with these new citizens.
These new citizens were to learn what it was to be called a Roman. Historian Tom Holland said that to be a Roman citizen meant that a person realized that he was truly free. However, there were stipulations placed on this new citizenship. The Roman citizen, whether inside or outside the city, must put aside the sense of the individual and focus on the good of the community."
http://www.ancient.eu/article/859/
History of the Roman Republic and its transition into dictatorship.... bare in mind that 2/3rds of the Roman Military were "allies" (non roman citizens), and this was a political move , not only between senators, but the first roman dictator used it to advantage to make Spain and Gaul roman citizens.
 
Last edited:
Not so sure about the article 4 part. I agree with you zippy.
But article 1 section 8 deals with immigration(uniform naturalization), it's a congressional power and the president can direct the executive branch in such a way as to how they will carry out the law.

Naturalization is separate from immigration. Naturalization is the process of a non- citizen becoming one. The Constitution says nothing about immigration. But if you have a process by which those not born in your country become citizens then it must be allowed for people to enter your country (immigrate) in the first place.
 
Not so sure about the article 4 part. I agree with you zippy.
But article 1 section 8 deals with immigration(uniform naturalization), it's a congressional power and the president can direct the executive branch in such a way as to how they will carry out the law.

No. It only deals with naturalization. The power to establish a uniform code of naturalization does not in any way imply a power to limit immigration, much less other travel in and out of the country, or the ability to work here, or any of the other countless powers the feds have taken on in their mission to control immigration.
 
Naturalization is separate from immigration. Naturalization is the process of a non- citizen becoming one. The Constitution says nothing about immigration. But if you have a process by which those not born in your country become citizens then it must be allowed for people to enter your country (immigrate) in the first place.

Not necessarily. People might enter without permission - refugees - and can not be sent back. -rep
 
Naturalization is separate from immigration. Naturalization is the process of a non- citizen becoming one. The Constitution says nothing about immigration. But if you have a process by which those not born in your country become citizens then it must be allowed for people to enter your country (immigrate) in the first place.

Not sure what you mean here. In the beginning it read as if you'd be disagreeing with me and then by the end it read as though we are on the same page here. Hopefully we agree, that's rare and always nice.
 
No. It only deals with naturalization. The power to establish a uniform code of naturalization does not in any way imply a power to limit immigration, much less other travel in and out of the country, or the ability to work here, or any of the other countless powers the feds have taken on in their mission to control immigration.

a process to naturalization would include some form of immigration. I don't see how you separate the two. I think this is semantics.

If you're contending the federal government has no authority on immigration, we disagree, but also, you're argument is misplaced. Why do you condemn the EO when you should condemn all the congressional laws passed relating to immigration. How can you separate the two?
 
White House to agree to honor it (1250 immigrants). No, they don't. Yes, they are back to supporting it. Very conflicting reports coming out.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-australian-pm-turnbull-have-tense-phone-call-over-muslim-refugees/

The president told Turnbull that it was “my intention” to honor the agreement, a phrase designed to leave the president wriggle room to back out of the deal, the newspaper reported.

There were some mixed-messages from Washington this week on the state of the agreement.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer confirmed on Wednesday that Mr. Trump had agreed to honor the deal.

But a White House statement sent to Australian Broadcasting Corp. on Thursday said: “The president is still considering whether or not he will move forward with this deal at this time.”

The U.S. State Department said in a statement later Thursday that the United States would honor the agreement “out of respect for close ties to our Australian ally and friend.”

President Trump’s decision to honor the refugee agreement has not changed and Spokesman Spicer’s comments stand,” the State Department said.
 
a process to naturalization would include some form of immigration. I don't see how you separate the two. I think this is semantics.

They are two totally different things. Laws restricting immigration aren't in any conceivable way necessary and proper for the establishment of a uniform code of naturalization. And nobody when the Constitution was ratified thought they were.

The federal government can define people as non-citizens. But it can't constitutionally keep them from living and working in the USA just because they're not citizens.
 
They are two totally different things. Laws restricting immigration aren't in any conceivable way necessary and proper for the establishment of a uniform code of naturalization. And nobody when the Constitution was ratified thought they were.

The federal government can define people as non-citizens. But it can't constitutionally keep them from living and working in the USA just because they're not citizens.

Would you please say this another way. I'm a bit confused so I think I'm missing something.
Are you suggesting the federal government has no authority to prevent people from crossing the US border with or without permission? Or are you saying something else?
thanks
 
Back
Top