Trump vows no ‘Dreamer’ bill if hard line gone

WASHINGTON — Democrats and Republicans maneuvered to blame each other for any failure to resolve the fate of hundreds of thousands of young immigrants as the Senate inched toward votes on various immigration proposals that all appeared to lack enough support to pass.

President Trump issued a statement Wednesday saying he would oppose any plan that fell short of a bill sponsored by Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley and six other Republicans that includes his “four pillars.” One of those is a path to citizenship for 1.8 million undocumented immigrants brought here as children. The others all appeal to immigration hard-liners: visa restrictions for relatives of future immigrants, cancellation of a visa lottery for countries that send few immigrants to the U.S., and $25 billion for a wall

on the Mexican border and other enforcement measures.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers led by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, appeared to be nearing agreement on a bill that would meet Trump’s border funding demands, and, to the dismay of immigrant groups, restrict the ability of young undocumented migrants to sponsor their parents for citizenship.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has said any bill must be approved by the end of the week. Votes were expected to start Thursday, but Senate leaders were still negotiating which bills would be considered. Democrats have resisted voting on politically charged amendments such as one by Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., that would withhold federal funds from “sanctuary cities,” such as San Francisco, that limit local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration agents.

The Grassley bill would provide legal status to more than twice the estimated 690,000 undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as minors and are protected from deportation under an Obama administration program called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.

Trump canceled the program last fall, giving Congress until March 5 to create a replacement. Two federal judges have ordered the program to continue for now. If Congress fails to act, it is likely that the Supreme Court would ultimately decide whether the program survives.

“I wouldn’t bet my car, but I would bet lunch that they might not end up with anything by the end of the week,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which seeks reductions in immigration.

A White House official, speaking at a background briefing on condition of anonymity, said the administration had already made “dramatic concessions.” The official said any bill that moves to the left of Grassley’s legislation would be rejected by the House “and the president wouldn’t be able to sign it.”

The official said that refusing to take up the White House offer of citizenship for young immigrants known as “Dreamers” creates “a moment of great peril for the Democratic Party.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that only in a “Kafkaesque world would Democrats be blamed” for Congress’ failure to protect the young immigrants. “We are in this pickle — in this worsening pickle, in this bad situation — because President Trump chose to end the DACA program,” he said.

Democrats and their allies said they’ve made big concessions by agreeing to tougher border security, including money for a wall.

“If nothing passes, it’s because Trump is insisting on all these poison pills,” said Tyler Moran, managing director of DC Immigration Hub, a proimmigrant activist group. “The fate of the Dreamers is on their hands.”

David Reimers, a professor emeritus at New York University and an expert on U.S. immigration policy, said voting patterns since the 1990s show that “the GOP is increasingly anti-immigration and the Democratic Party is increasingly liberal on immigration. That means we have a blockage that makes it very hard for legislation to get through.”

Democrats are opposed to any changes in legal immigration, especially the ability of new immigrants to sponsor their extended families. Current law allows immigrants to sponsor not only their spouses and minor children, but their parents, adult siblings and adult children. Called “family unification” by supporters and “chain migration” by opponents, these provisions were created by a landmark 1965 law that transformed the ethnic composition of the United States and accounts for most of the 1.2 million legal immigrants who enter the country each year.

“Unless you’re a Native American, or your ancestors were kidnapped and brought over on slave ships, everyone has an immigrant background in this country,” said Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif. “Most immigrants came with, or pulled over, their family members, in particular their immediately family members. It is just part of the history of this country, and we should not deny its most recent immigrants that opportunity as well.”

Most Democrats support a bill by Sens. Chris Coons, DDel., and John McCain, R-Ariz., that would shield young immigrants and provide for a “smart” border wall that relies more on sensors and other technology than physical barriers. A companion House bill by Reps. Will Hurd, R-Texas, and Pete Aguilar, D-Redlands (San Bernardino County), has 27 GOP House co-sponsors, including San Joaquin Valley Republicans Jeff Denham and David Valadao, both of whom have large Latino populations in their districts.

The potential Collins compromise had support from several centrists in both parties but remained a work in progress. It faced strong opposition from many Republicans and the White House, as well as from pro-immigration groups who oppose any restrictions on the ability of DACA-eligible immigrants to sponsor their parents.

“To cut the kids off from their parents is cruel, but a central demand of Republicans throughout the negotiations of these various bills,” said Marshall Fitz, director of immigration at the Emerson Collective, a social justice advocacy group. “It would require a lot of soul searching among Dreamers whether they would even be able to support that.”

Colorado Sens. Cory Gardner, a Republican, and Michael Bennet, a Democrat, also have a proposal to provide a path to citizenship for young immigrants, meet Trump’s $25 billion funding demand for border security, and make no changes to family visas. The White House shot down a plan by Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., to extend the DACA program for three years.

Under pressure from conservatives, House Republican leaders began assessing whether they had enough votes for a bill by House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., that is far more conservative than the Grassley plan backed by the White House.

The Goodlatte bill would provide temporary, renewable legal status for just 614,900 DACA participants, and eliminate extended-family visas not only for future but also current immigrants, including the backlog of 4 million family visa applications. The bill would require employers to use an Internet-based system called E-verify to determine if workers are in the country legally, criminalize illegal presence in the country and block federal funds to sanctuary cities.