Las Vegas Review-Journal

Saving DACA not the target Dems say it is

-

Ncongressi­onal Democrats say they’ll fight “tooth and nail” to protect participan­ts in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. But their tough talk imperils the chances of a bipartisan compromise that would benefit the very people they claim to champion.

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump announced he would end DACA in six months. President Barack Obama created DACA in 2012 via executive action. DACA allowed illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children to receive work authorizat­ion and administra­tive protection from deportatio­n. In Nevada, about 13,000 have signed up for the program.

The impetus for Trump’s decision was a coalition of Republican attorneys general promising to challenge DACA in court if he didn’t end it. They had set a Tuesday deadline.

The lawsuit almost certainly would have succeeded. In 2016, a deadlocked Supreme Court left in place an injunction on a similar Obama program that applied to adults. It was the right decision, since the Constituti­on gives the legislativ­e branch the responsibi­lity to make immigratio­n policy. Obama’s executive action was a blatant executive power grab.

Although Trump is winding down DACA, he’s been sympatheti­c to children brought to the U.S. illegally. He could have ended DACA in January. He left it in place until the attorneys general forced his hand.

Even so, the program will remain in place for six months to give Congress time to pass a constituti­onally valid fix. Trump’s press secretary said Tuesday that he wants DACA to be part of a larger immigratio­n bill.

Rather than acknowledg­e these realities, Nevada U.S. Rep. Jacky Rosen, a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate, said DACA participan­ts “are now being placed squarely in the crosshairs of President Trump’s deportatio­n force.”

Rep. Ruben Kihuen further attacked Trump, saying that “this administra­tion has proven time and again their only goal is to foster anti-immigrant and divisive rhetoric.”

How Trump signaling he would sign a bill that includes DACA squares with either a “deportatio­n force” or fostering “anti-immigrant” rhetoric wasn’t explained.

Although Republican­s control both chambers of Congress, they need Democrat votes to pass a bill. Policy bills require 60 votes to break

JOECKS

a filibuster in the Senate.

The compromise looks obvious: Republican­s support DACA, which means voting for a limited amnesty,anddemocra­tssupportb­order security measures, including funding for Trump’s wall, and increased internal enforcemen­t measures, like mandating the use of E-verify.

Given their minority status, enshrining DACA into law would be a significan­t policy win for Democrats.

But their statements show Democrats remain divisive — and might be getting greedy. Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto said Trump’s decision shows “he stands with racists.” Rep. Dina Titus said Trump has “xenophobia.”

So Trump offers an immigratio­n olive branch, a window to pass something Democrats have long claimedtow­ant,anddemocra­ts respond with verbal grenades? It suggests that the highest priority of Nevada’s congressio­nal Democrats isn’t passing a DACA compromise but pressing the issue for political

advantage.

A majority of Americans support providing legal status for DACA participan­ts. But if Congress passes a DACA bill, Trump and the Republican­s will get the credit ahead of the midterm elections.

Would Democrats stall a compromise and draw a hard line against a border wall solely to hammer Republican­s in 2018? Would they rather go all-in for the election of a Democratic president and Congress in 2020 — no sure thing — so they can pass an immigratio­n bill that doesn’t include more border

walls?

That strategy guarantees current DACA participan­ts stay in limbo for at least three years.

Democrats’ rhetoric suggests that, far from fighting “tooth and nail” for a favored constituen­cy, they’re much more interested in political gain.

Victor Joecks’ column appears in the Nevada section each Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. Contact him at vjoecks@reviewjour­nal.com or 702-383-4698. Follow @victorjoec­ks on Twitter.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States