Mediaboss Marketing

By Juan A. Lozano Associated Press

HOUSTON -- A federal judge temporarily blocked President Barack Obama's executive action on immigration Monday, giving a coalition of 26 states time to pursue a lawsuit that aims to permanently stop the orders.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen's decision puts on hold Obama's orders that could spare as many as five million people who are in the U.S. illegally from deportation.

The federal government is expected to appeal the ruling to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. The Justice Department had no immediate comment late Monday night.

Hanen's decision will not have any immediate effect because the first of Obama's orders -- to expand a program that protects young immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the U.S. illegally as children -- is not set to start taking effect until Feb. 18. The other major part of Obama's order, which extends deportation protections to parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country for some years, is not expected to begin until May 19.

In a 2013 ruling in a separate case, Hanen suggested the Homeland Security Department should be arresting parents living in the U.S. illegally who induce their children to cross the border illegally.

The coalition, led by Texas and made up of mostly conservative states in the South and Midwest, argues that Obama has violated the "Take Care Clause" of the U.S. Constitution, which they say limits the scope of presidential power. They also say the order will force increased investment in law enforcement, health care and education.

In their request for the injunction, the coalition said it was necessary because it would be "difficult or impossible to undo the President's lawlessness after the Defendants start granting applications for deferred action."

Congressional Republicans have vowed to block Obama's actions on immigration by cutting off Homeland Security Department spending for the program. Earlier this year, the Republican-controlled House passed a $39.7 billion spending bill to fund the department through the end of the budget year, but attached language to undo Obama's executive actions. The fate of that House-passed bill is unclear as Republicans in the Senate are six votes shy of the 60-vote majority needed to advance most legislation.

The White House has said Obama's executive order is not out of legal bounds and that the U.S. Supreme Court and Congress have said federal officials can set priorities in enforcing immigration laws. Past U.S. Supreme Court decisions have granted immigration officials "broad discretion" on deportation matters.

Read the original:
Immigration reform: Judge blocks Obama's executive order

By Lou Cannon, State Net Capitol Journal | Published on 02.16.2015 12:00 p.m.

With national immigration reform stymied by partisan division, several states have extended privileges associated with U.S. citizenship to millions of unauthorized immigrants. At the same time, states are leading the legal charge against President Barack Obamas executive orders protecting up to 5 million immigrants from deportation.

California is in the forefront of states accommodating unauthorized immigrants. Hundreds of thousands of them flocked to 150 Department of Motor Vehicleoffices and four special processing centers last month as the Golden State rolled out a law allowing anyone 18 and over to obtain a drivers license after passing road-knowledge and driving tests.

Two of three individualswho took the written test in a language other than English failed to pass on the first try. Even so, the DMV licensed 40,000 new drivers in January and is on track to reach a three-year goal of 1.4 million new licenses.

The new law has been largely welcomed by law-enforcement officers as a safety issue. Julie Powell, a spokeswoman for the California Highway Patrol, said that requiring unauthorized immigrants already on the road to pass a driving test and obtain insurance will bolster public safety.

Californias liberalized policy on drivers licenses is the latest in a series of laws that have eased the lives of unauthorized immigrants, called undocumented by their advocates and illegal by their detractors. California is home to nearly a fourth of all such immigrants in the United States 2.8 million out of 11.6 million, according to Pew Research figures.

In 2014, California enacted 26 laws on immigration, many removing long-existing barriers. Unauthorized immigrants in California can now receive subsidized health care, student loans and financial aid, and licenses to practice law and medicine. Child welfare courts no longer make immigration status a determinant of guardianship.

These laws reflect the liberal political leanings of a state where Democrats hold every statewide office and control the Legislature.More fundamentally, they reflect a sea change in public perceptions of Latin American and Asian immigrants, not long ago regarded as a drain on the state.

In 1994, California voters approved a ballot initiative intended to deny educational and medical benefits to unauthorized immigrants. Courts found most of this initiative unconstitutional but vestiges remained on the books until 2014, when they were repealed at the behest of Latino legislators.

A recent survey by the Public Policy Institute of California found that Californians are more likely to say that immigrants are a benefit to California because of their hard work and job skills (63 percent) than to say that immigrants are a burden to the state because they use public services (32 percent).

Originally posted here:
Lou Cannon: In Paradox, States Play Conflicted Role in National Immigration Debate

Everyone wants to know whetherJeb Bush can survive his support for Common Core and comprehensive immigration reform in today's Republican Party.

One deal-breaker that might surprise people, though: His opposition to gay marriage.

NBC News and Marist Collegeare out witha batch ofnew 2016 primary polls. And as you might expect,Common Core,immigration reform, belief in man-made climate change and support for raising taxes on the wealthy are among those with the potential to alienate lotsof conservatives.

But according to the polls, so does opposition to gay marriage -- an issue on whichBush agrees with basically every other candidate.

The polls, in fact, show that about half of likely GOP caucus and primary voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina said they find opposition to gay marriage either "mostly" or "totally" unacceptable in a candidate. Fifty-two percent of likely Republican primary voters in New Hampshire and South Carolina said opposing gay marriage is either mostly or totally unacceptable, while 47 percent of likely Iowa caucus voters agree.

By comparison, 63 percent of Iowa voters say belief in man-made climate change (and fighting it) is unacceptable, 56 percent of New Hampshire voters say raising taxes on the wealthy is a non-starter, and 52 percent of South Carolina voters say support for comprehensive immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship is a deal-breakeron one level or another.

Voters in all three states find a candidate who supports gay marriage to be about as amenable as one who doesn't toe the party line on any of these issues.

And while the numbers are surprising, they make some sense. A Pew poll conducted in March 2014 showed 39 percent of Republicans and Republican leaners supported gay marriage. Add the passage of time andthe fact that non-Republicans can vote in New Hampshire and South Carolina, and you've got a potentially less anti-gay marriage electorate come next year.

There's also the possibility that the poll question confused some people. Asking people about gay marriage opposition rather than support for it brings double-negatives into the picture, possibly confusing some poll respondents. And people are more apt to respond in the negative when in doubt.

But it's also pretty clear from this and other polls that there are a growing number of Republicans who support gay marriage. So does it allmean we'll see a GOP presidential candidate in 2016 come out in support of gay marriage? Probably not. While there are some supporters of immigration reform (see: Bush and Marco Rubio) and Common Core (Bush) in the group, the name of the game is alienating as few people as possible.

Continue reading here:
The Fix: The most surprising gay marriage poll weve seen in a while

Scott Walker: Immigration Reform Doesnt Mean Amnesty
"THIS VIDEO IS FAIR USE UNDER U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW BECAUSE IT IS (1) NON-COMMERCIAL, (2) TRANSFORMATIVE IN NATURE, (3) USES NO MORE OF THE ORIGINAL WORK THAN N...

By: LSUDVM

Read this article:
Scott Walker: Immigration Reform Doesnt Mean Amnesty - Video

Radio Show, 2015, February 6, #immigration reform
Discussing Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Border Security and other related issues (visa, I-94, International travel, H-1B transfer, premium processing, E...

By: Rajiv S. Khanna

Read more:
Radio Show, 2015, February 6, #immigration reform - Video