New Report Shows Government Gave DACA Protection to
Thousands of Criminals
Roughly
8 percent of those who received DACA protection under President Barack Obama
had criminal records. (Photo: Siphiwe Sibeko/Reuters/ Newscom)
COMMENTARY
BY
Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide
range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment,
immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in
The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies
and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research.
Christopher Baldacci is a member of the Young
Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.
Historian Jacob
Burckhardt once warned against being deceived by “terrible simplifiers.” If he
hadn’t died in 1897, you might be tempted to think he was writing about
defenders of President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
program.
The
left consistently characterizes
all DACA recipients as though they were innocent, law-abiding Phi Beta Kappa
college graduates. They also treat anyone questioning DACA as a child-hater.
That is just one of the mythssurrounding
the program.
When President Donald
Trump last tried to rescind DACA, a program that Obama implemented without
legal authority or the approval of Congress, liberals decried the move as an
attack on peace-loving immigrants. However, new research challenges that
simplistic narrative.
Recently,
the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services did a comprehensive review of
aliens who applied for benefits under DACA. Getting approved under DACA
provided a period of deferred action (a promise that the alien would not be
deported) as well as access to certain government benefits such as Social
Security and Medicaid.
The U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services found that approximately 8 percent of DACA
beneficiaries had previously been arrested, including for crimes such assault,
rape, and murder, yet were still approved.
Judicial
Watch warned back
in 2013 that DACA’s very limited vetting procedures were woefully inadequate,
and the data has proven it right.
For those who think
that, during the Obama administration, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services was actually checking the backgrounds of all DACA applicants, nothing
could be further from the truth. It implemented a “lean and light” system in
which only a few randomly selected DACA applications were ever actually
investigated, and only rarely was any of the information on the applications
themselves even verified.
This
new data from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services contradict claims
that DACA has not been a shield for criminal aliens. Director L. Francis
Cissna lamented: “The
truth is that we let those with criminal arrests for sexually assaulting a
minor, kidnapping, human trafficking, child pornography, and even murder be
provided protection from removal.”
Not only were some of
the DACA beneficiaries—the so-called “Dreamers”—criminals before they received
deferred action, but a number of them committed crimes after they were given a
free pass. Of the group of DACA beneficiaries with prior arrests, 13 percent of
them—nearly 8,000 aliens—were arrested for another crime after they were in the
United States.
The
Center for Immigration Studies reported that, as of January, more than 2,000
individuals had their protection under DACA revoked for criminal or gang
activity, including with MS-13, considered by
many to be the most dangerous and brutal criminal gang in the country. Yet
only 30 percent were
actually deported or put in custody as a result.
Of
course, those who want to treat illegal aliens as if they are legal immigrants
want to ignore criminal activity both before and after individuals became DACA
beneficiaries. One recent study from
Arizona found that DACA-eligible immigrants made up 2 percent of the state
population but 8 percent of the prison population.
The 8,000 crimes
committed by DACA beneficiaries who were given the privilege of remaining in
the U.S. would never have occurred if DACA didn’t exist—or at the very least if
its prohibitions were actually enforced.
Obama’s unilateral
executive action setting up the DACA program was beyond his constitutional and
statutory authority—and dangerous.
The president was
never meant to implement immigration policy with the stroke of a pen. The
Constitution entrusts Congress, not the president, with the power to regulate
immigration so that it can debate, deliberate, and work out the most effective
solution to the country’s immigration issues.
The evidence from
DACA’s actual implementation helps make sense of Congress’ refusal to pass the
DREAM Act, which is DACA’s legislative equivalent. Like DACA, this legislation
would be unfair to legal immigrants—those who abide by the rule of law when
they come to America—and it would reward illegal behavior, acting like a magnet
to draw in even more illegal aliens.
Congress, not the
president, has the final word on this issue. And the No. 1 concern of Congress
should be ensuring the safety of the American people.
No comments:
Post a Comment