Obama Planning Major Immigration Reform Push As Arizona Lawsuit Nears

President Obama is slated to deliver a major address on immigration reform this week as his Department of Justice puts the final touches on a lawsuit challenging the legality of the immigration legislation passed by the state of Arizona.

The White House announced on Tuesday that the president would head to American University School of International Service on Thursday for "remarks on the need to fix our broken immigration system."

The speech comes as the administration has spent the last several days consulting with key stakeholders in the immigration debate as well as alerting members on the Hill that the DoJ's lawsuit will likely be announced soon.

On Monday night, officials met with a wide range of immigration-reform and union leaders to discuss steps forward on comprehensive legislation. The list of attendees included Karen Narasaki of Asian American Justice Center, Rosa Rosales of LULAC, Janet Murguia of National Coucil of La Raza, Rev. Samuel Rodriguez of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, Lillian Rodriguez Lopez of the National Hispanic Leadership Association, Eliseo Medina of SEIU, Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, Angelica Salas of CHIRLA, Gustavo Torres of CASA de Maryland, Juan Rodriguez of Trail of Dreams, Dolores Huerta, Bishop Kicanas, Vice President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Ali Noorani of National Immigration Forum, and Deepak Barghava, Center for Community Change.

According to an official briefed on that meeting, the president talked through various concerns about the current failures of immigration law, as well as the focal points for implementing a new set of reforms. Obama talked about building off of the legislative framework put out by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). He also reaffirmed his opposition to Arizona's new law -- which would grant broad powers to law enforcement officials to detain and even expel illegal immigrants -- and stressed that the Department of Justice was continuing to review the legislation.

The president is scheduled to follow up that meeting with another gathering at the White House on Tuesday with members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Already, his team has been engaged in the delicate process of Hill outreach. According to a Senior House Democratic aide, officials at the White House have held discussions about the impending lawsuit with members on the Hill, in addition to receiving input from key lawmakers about what kind of immigration reform package stands the best chance of being implemented into law.

Comments

[MakeAWish]

01:33 PM on 07/01/2010

Without closing the borders or making it a felony to hire an illegal, what good is any kind of reform? It will be just another Reagan amnesty for millions and there will be millions coming to take their place in a few years from now, and then there will be another amnesty for these new millions

Obama's health care bill is written so that all these millions of illegals and their children with amnesty, will qualify for free health care or subsidized through medicaid. Their children as minorities, will also qualify for the millions in college grants that was specifically earmarked for minorities in Obama's health care bill.

Talk about discrimination, it's the poor middle class and their children who are being discriminated against.

All being paid for with borrowed money.

What happened to the pay as you go BS?

[zendem1]

11:49 AM on 07/01/2010

The republicans tried to get on top of this after Lee Atwater told them that Hispanics would be the next major demographic over the next twenty years, and if the GOP could capture it, it would offset the democrats hold on African-American voters.
Which is why Reagan did what he did in 1986 when he signed the bill. It was all political, and he didn;'t care a whit about the long term problem. Typical Republican thinking, which is why Reagan was such a failure.

[econ1]

12:33 PM on 07/14/2010

Repeating Reagan's mistake is not the answer. Ed Koch has a very good analysis in another Huff post.

In part:

"The President has stated, according to The Times editorial of July 2nd, "Our nation has the right and obligation to control its borders," he said, but sealing off that vast space with troops and fences is a fantasy. And no amount of security at the border does anything about the undocumented 11 million who have already crossed it.

The President glosses over the fact that if we are not able to police our borders, as soon as the current 11 million illegals are given amnesty, a new crop of illegals will be walking across our borders. Is the President saying that once the 11 million are given amnesty, we will find a way to stop a new wave of illegals? If so, why not find and impose that way now?"

He is talking about Obama.

[SouthernBubba]

05:40 PM on 06/30/2010

Don't the nits in charge have something better to do than post up "access denied" pages. For TggerJen, I 100% agree with you, especially with your solutions that start off with something about biometric id's. What pity that threads are destroyed for what I am positive are no good reasons.

[TobyPLD]

02:35 PM on 06/30/2010

Obama is playing politics with these 'special' groups. When the American people shut amnesty down, he can say "Hey, at least I tried really hard. I even gave a speech, so keep voting democrat"

[TggerJen]

04:48 PM on 06/30/2010

Total effects though?
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/05/obama-poll-arizona-illegal-immigrant.html

"President Obama is opposed to the strict new illegal-immigrant law in Arizona. But a new poll now finds that he is in a shrinking minority of Americans and Democrats who do.

A new Pew Research Center Poll finds fully 73% of the country thinks police requesting immigration status documents is fine, while 67% think detaining someone for a status check is OK.

The poll reports that, overall, 59% approve of the law's broad provisions, while less than a third (32%) now oppose them. That is up significantly from a similar poll earlier this month.

Democrats, a large majority of whom originally opposed the law, are now....
... evenly split 45-46% approve-disapprove. The number of Democrats supporting the measure has been growing as more information spreads about its legal provisions and safeguards.

.... A solid majority of independents (64%) also support the controversial measure.

Fifty-four percent of Americans in the new Pew Poll disapprove of Obama's job performance on immigration while those who approve have waned from 31% last November to 29% last month to 25% today.

Again, Obama's Democratic party is now split (38% disapprove, 37% approve). .... But of potential future concern for the White House is that, among independents, a crucial leg of his national support in 2008, more than twice as many disapprove of his immigration handling (57%) as approve (25%)."

[SouthernBubba]

05:43 PM on 06/30/2010

Go! Go! Go! Facts and figures! Rah! Rah! Rah!

[DCDave]

12:47 PM on 06/30/2010

Don't be distracted, this is an attempt to focus our attention away from the Administrations incompent handling of the gulf situation.

[MPAH]

02:39 PM on 06/30/2010

What administration? If I am not mistaken all this is in response of AZ approach to the situation:

Arizona State Treasurer Dean Martin—currently vying for the Republican candidacy for governor—recently announced a plan to create tent cities to house the expected increase in the number of illegal immigrants arrested once the controversial new immigration laws go into effect.

Modeled on current camp-like set ups used by Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Martin made the assertion in response to growing concern that the cash-strapped state may not have enough funds to enact SB 1070.

In Arizona, state Republicans plan on introducing a bill that would deny birth certificates to children born in Arizona to parents who are not legal U.S. citizens. The law is the brainchild of Russell Pearce, the same man who orchestrated Senate Bill 1070

As it stands the fourteenth amendment reads: "All persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."

So the president has to react to it

[DCDave]

02:53 PM on 06/30/2010

The Presidential administration.

In terms of the tents, doesn't that seem more humane than jail.

The last bit isn't law yet, how do you respond to something that might or might not pass.

[dsws]

12:25 PM on 06/30/2010

The most important thing to do about illegal immigration is to ensure that illegal immigrants have the same ability to deal with bad working conditions -- organize, sue, work with agencies like OSHA, and so on -- as legal workers do. If legal and illegal workers could demand the same wages, benefits, and working conditions, and there were any risk (legal or PR) in hiring illegals, employers would hire a legal worker every time. The whole problem would vanish overnight.

[WhatChanged]

12:40 PM on 07/01/2010

B ullshut on that. Why do we have to extend these abilities to people who violated our laws and broke into our country.

[Disdain]

09:56 AM on 06/30/2010

Here's a novel idea, why not enforce the laws we already have on the books? They serve no purpose if they're not enforced.

[Le Facteur 99]

10:08 AM on 06/30/2010

They are enforced, perhaps you don't realize the daunting magnitude of resources it takes. Logistically we are outmatched.

[radmo]

10:50 AM on 06/30/2010

Only because we choose to be. The resources exist to close down the border if only the will existed.

[Disdain]

11:15 AM on 07/02/2010

How are they enforced? You're not even open to the idea of deporting those you catch breaking the law as the one in AZ calls for. If someone is arrested for committing a crime, checking his legal status should be automatic. The end result should be immediate deportation after they serve their time. If we reward them with the so called "path to citizenship", we are just inviting more people to come here illegally.

[DCDave]

02:56 PM on 06/30/2010

You are completly right of course. The best thing to do is to punish the companies that hire illegal labor. If there are no jobs they will all just go home and that will be the end of it.

[Disdain]

11:10 AM on 07/02/2010

It has to be both. Punish those who hire them and deport those we catch particularly in the course of a criminal act.

[FOXYROSE]

09:51 AM on 06/30/2010

We give Mexico billions every year to fight the drug lords and then we give them billions in free education, food stamps, medical, etc, etc. I say secure the borders and go after the people that are hiring the illegals - is that too much to ask as a US citizen? Does anyone know just how much we give to other countries and to all the global organizations - bet it a pretty penny - money that we need here desperately to pay down the debt to China to preserve our way of life.

[dtairtime]

06:59 PM on 06/30/2010

I agree and love your Norwich terrier.

[Lisette53]

07:01 PM on 06/30/2010

We give them billions in free education? The majority of kids are legal, they are entitled...and the parents pay taxes one way or another even if it is just thru rentals or the new 1% education tax in AZ. And AZ DOES NOT give free medical or food stamps to illegals. The rest of your post I am okay with.

[TggerJen]

09:22 PM on 06/30/2010

Link to reliable and valid data that most of the children of illegal aliens here are legal?

[hey0there]

08:32 AM on 06/30/2010

can you picture the FLOOD of illegals running across the border at this very moment? This is one for the record books, how many per minute

[CCee]

09:12 AM on 06/30/2010

When you quit relying on "Picturing the number" and can present the Foxless-facts instead you may be taken a little more seriously...

Border crossing are down overall...

"Can you picture the FLOOD of illegals running across the border at this very moment? "

More Right Wing Fear Mongering Hysteria at it's finest.

[MsGray]

11:13 AM on 06/30/2010

There's an amnesty in the offing - time to get across the border and secure myself some fake documents so I can jump on that gravy train.

[MiraMcB]

11:15 AM on 06/30/2010

Down overall compared to what? How many is ok for you? For me, 10 of them crossing my property, pooping on our lawn and leaving their tons of trash blowing all over our pasture in the wind is TOO many. Ok? And that's just for starters...

[CrazyEyes]

11:28 AM on 06/30/2010

Today the president of Mexico announced that there is nobody left in Mexico. It was a TSUNAMI.

[MPAH]

11:30 AM on 06/30/2010

What in the world were you trying to say?

[Loveforlife]

12:46 AM on 06/30/2010

I'm out. Watching Jay now. Adios' All you crazy posters.
:D

[CCee]

09:14 AM on 06/30/2010

Adios' Mi Amigo ... Glad to see one of us has better things to do this morning :o)

[hey0there]

12:35 AM on 06/30/2010

will the newly minted american mexicans be able to find work, or will their illicit employers suddenly turn their backs and proffer a cold shoulder

[CCee]

09:33 AM on 06/30/2010

If the Real-ID portion of this new immigration bill is passed the businesses who claim employee deductions will not be able to hire illegals if they want to...

If you are serious about illegal immigration - vote against anyone who stands against this provision of the bill, because until you remove the draw of jobs from illegals you are never gonna get a Real grip on this situation.

Last time - The loudest voices Against Real ID and preventing businesses hiring illegals...Arizona I think :o)

[Lisette53]

07:06 PM on 06/30/2010

Well as an employer who had experience in the past with people who turned out to be illegal...I would love to have them back. Now before any of you people jump all over me, I said in the past and NO I did not KNOW they were illegal. I came from Canada where we didn't even have a Taco Bell-So I went to the extent of going out and learning Spanish because I thought that was the labor force in my area. And sadly it was the best laborers I ever had in either country AND I did NOT pay them less than min. wage.

[TggerJen]

09:27 PM on 06/30/2010

Paying over minimum wage is not the same as paying a living wage. A single mother with 3 children would be under the federal poverty line based on what you pay for full time work. It's an example of how illegal aliens drive down wages for work that should pay a living wage.

[hey0there]

12:31 AM on 06/30/2010

this is really dreadful timing - unless they had planned all along for him to be a one-termer (it sure does seem suspicious in retrospect that the 'other' party chose the oldest and the stupidest politicians in their stable to run against a young hipster intellectual

[CCee]

09:54 AM on 06/30/2010

Maybe he will step aside after his first term and let Hillary take over? Who on the Right is going to take Hillary Clinton at this point in time..

You also have to think that although this administration has done many things that winds even me up, I can't think of any accomplishment the Right has achieved other than trying to sink the Dems at every given opportunity and at this Country's Expense.

This tactic works with their more rabid base but then why cater to the base - it's already there - that's why you call it the base.

But with independents like me ... Why would I then Vote Republican? I look at the alternatives to Barack Obama, and I can't see anyone on the Republican team who a sane person Could vote for... They have stood for Nothing but tax cuts for the Wealthy - Tax free Savings Accounts as a health care plan and the abolishment of Social Security and Medicare,

Nothing here I can agree with... Their plan hasn't changed since they ran the country into the Worst Recession since the Great Depression... You want to travel that Same road again? Not me...

Although there is a lot to find fault with this administration they are at least trying to get things done... The Republicans are lock-step voting to prevent any type of progress for political points... In times like this... words like "Traitors" Come to mind.

[dsws]

12:34 PM on 06/30/2010

Why cater to the base? Because they're the ones who donate, volunteer, act as opinion-leaders for their friends, and pay attention beyond campaign sound-bites. And they're pretty well in line with swing-turnout voters, i.e. the people who may not vote but if they do it will definitely be for your side. Swing-turnout votes (which just increase your total) are only half as valuable as actual swing votes (which both increase your total and decrease your opponent's), but there are more than twice as many swing-turnout voters as actual swing voters.

[Jefferson78]

12:29 AM on 06/30/2010

Arrest any business owner or manager that illegally hires. Deport anyone who is in the country illegally. We don't need new laws, we need to enforce the laws we have.

[seted]

08:44 AM on 06/30/2010

I agree, but it seems easier to arrest the addict than the dealer.

[CCee]

10:01 AM on 06/30/2010

So why not round up all the addicts?

[USAFVET76]

12:09 AM on 06/30/2010

Please please please push for Amnesty. It will fail miserably and guarantee the Dems no longer have a majority. I don't trust Republicans to do the right thing, but these guys in control now are so far removed from reality...................the American working, taxpayer, law-abiding citizen are being ignored. Please push amnesty.

[Acert]

12:12 AM on 06/30/2010

Obama doesn't need congressional approval to declare amnesty. The constitution says he has the power to issue pardons. So, he has no reason to include it in any immigration reform bill.

[USAFVET76]

12:14 AM on 06/30/2010

Oh, let him do it and watch the response. He'll need to sign Executive orders for anything and everything he wants to do, because the future Congress will not give him the votes to pass a piss test.

[hrpmap]

12:21 AM on 06/30/2010

You obviously aren't very intellegent. How would the parden read? I Barak Obama, do hereby parden all immigrants in this country for violating federal law, huh huh, no wait. There's drug runners here, people wanted in their own country, warrents for crimes committed here, human smuglers, Oh the he** with it.

[Acert]

12:13 AM on 06/30/2010

The president doesn't need Congressional approval to declare amnesty because the constitution gives him the authority to issue pardons. Therefore, he has no reason to include it in any immigration reform bill.

[Acert]

12:17 AM on 06/30/2010

Sorry about the double post.

[USAFVET76]

12:08 AM on 06/30/2010

Some spout this idea that amnesty or some path to citizenship is necessary becasue we can't deport the 30 million illegals.
Yes we can without it costing billions of dollars.
Remember, how the illegals got here? Because they had an incentive.
We could EASILY provide them an incentive to leave and not return.
1. Announce that starting 1 January any person hiring an illegal alien will be prosecuted.
2. Announce that starting 1 January any person caught in a crime will have their immigration status confirmed. If illegal, they are jailed for X years or deported.
3. Announce that any child that enrolls in school that does not speak English must provide documents to prove their citizenship.
4. Announce effective 1 January any state or city that provides sanctuary to illegals will have govt funds cut by X %.

Within 90 days they'll be flooding the border. GIve them incentives to leave and they will do so as quickly as they came here. With little cost to the taxpayer.

[Acert]

12:16 AM on 06/30/2010

"3. Announce that any child that enrolls in school that does not speak English must provide documents to prove their citizenship."

You say what you want to about adults who come into the country illegally, but leave the children, who are either born here or have no choice in coming here, alone.

About number 4, what do you mean by any city or state providing sanctuary to illegal immigrants? Please tell me it something other than a government that refuses to stop people in the streets asking for their papers.

[USAFVET76]

12:18 AM on 06/30/2010

If a child can't speak English at the time they start school, investigaet their citzenship. If they were born here, fine. If they and mommy and daddy are illegals.............adios.

Number 4 would be those cities that use taxpayer dollars to provide welfare, education, or other type benefits to illegals. Such as San Francisco.

[hrpmap]

12:47 AM on 06/30/2010

Notice...not...include...foreinnors...aliens...families of ambassadors ministers...by the co-author of the 14nth amendmant.
"Every Person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.
Senator Jacob Howard, Co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, 1866

[Jefferson78]

12:30 AM on 06/30/2010

Amen!