Obama Claims Power to Make Illegal Immigrants Eligible for Social Security, Disability

CNSnews.com ^ | 04/06/2016 | Terence P. Jeffrey

[MaxistheBest]

Does the president of the United States have the power to unilaterally tell millions of individuals who are violating federal law that he will not enforce that law against them now, that they may continue to violate that law in the future and that he will take action that makes them eligible for federal benefit programs for which they are not currently eligible due to their unlawful status?

Through Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, President Barack Obama is telling the Supreme Court exactly this right now.

The solicitor general calls what Obama is doing "prosecutorial discretion."

[omega4412]

The Solicitor General calls it “prosecutorial discretion.” The Declaration of Independence puts it differently: “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws”

[lowbridge]

Bump

[Elderberry]

Sounds like what he wants to do would be a predicate offense under the RICO statutes. As if he could be charged.

[Obadiah]

As long as the corrupt MSM view this as the pathway to producing more Democrats they will say nothing. Republicans have pledged to do nothing that will upset the Cartel and their seat at the trough.

[Jack Hammer]

And once again, YOU - the American taxpayer - will fork over your hard-earned dollars for a daffy and misguided (not to mention illegal) obama boondoggle.

[DoughtyOne]

Obama makes these kinds of claims. Other politicians make other absurd claims.

“I deserve the nomination even if I only got 27% of the vote and 31% of the delegates up ‘till now. I don’t care if someone else did get 37% of the vote and 47% of the delegates up ‘till now. It’s owed to me. I deserve it!”

Same difference.

Poor Scruz (loose)

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Hate to say it, but this is a really terrible article because it doesn't tell you which party won in the court below. That's pretty relevant given the real possibility of a 4-4 split.

Good news is that Texas won below, so a split means Obama loses

[Baynative]

Obama clearly hates this country and is trying to break it forever.

[Whenifhow]

Texas won the lower court decision, so in the case of a 4-4 decision, the lower court decision will prevail.

On April 18, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case. Entitled United States v. Texas,

[ ]
More from article:

So, as explained to the Supreme Court by Obama’s solicitor general, when DHS grants an alien here illegally “deferred action” under the president’s DAPA policy, that alien is not given “lawful immigration status” and can be removed from the country “at any time.” However, according to the solicitor general, that alien will be authorized to work in the United States and will be “considered ‘lawfully present’” for purposes of being eligible for “the Social Security retirement and disability, Medicare, and railroad-worker programs.”

The U.S. Constitution imposes this straightforward mandate on the president: “(H)e shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

When the Supreme Court agreed in January to hear U.S. v. Texas, it made a telling request. It asked the parties to argue whether Obama’s DAPA policy “violates the Take Care Clause of the Constitution.”

The Obama administration has taken care of just one thing here: It has constructed a convoluted — and unconvincing argument — it hopes will provide the activists on the Supreme Court with a cover story to explain why this president need not faithfully execute the nation’s immigration laws.

[FlyingEagle]

Sounds more like high crimes and misdemeanors

[GOPJ]

It’s funny on one level... Obama’s gonna stick it to the CHEAP LABOR EXPRESS.

Not only are illegals expected to vote Democrat, they’re also suppose to take on the mantle of dependent and angry.

Just when we thought it couldn’t get any creepier...