The Hillary Clinton campaign announced on August 14 that it is launching program to recruit so-called “DREAMers,” into a voter-registration army. The announcement was timed to coincide with the fourth anniversary of the Obama administration’s commencement of enrollment of these DREAMers — illegal aliens brought to this country as children — into the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals’ (DACA) program.
The Clinton campaign’s statement read, in part:
Hillary for America is launching a national voter registration program, “Mi Sueño, Tu Voto” (My Dream, Your Vote), to organize DREAMers to mobilize their communities and ask voters to consider what is at stake for their families in November. “DREAMers have played a pivotal role in our campaign, advocating for families who constantly live in fear of deportation — so we’ve created a program that aims to turn these stories into action,” said Lorella Praeli, National Director of the Latino Vote. The program calls on DREAMers across the country to join the campaign’s grassroots efforts to secure commitments from their community to vote for their future in November.
Praeli came to this country illegally from Peru as a child but later gained a green card though marriage. Her statement continued:
We founded this program on the premise that, one by one — through friends, families, co-workers or classmates — DREAMers’ futures would be considered on Election day. We may not have the right to vote, but “Mi Sueno, Tu Voto” will help ensure that our stories are heard and it will send a clear signal to Donald Trump that we cannot be silenced.
While none of the DREAMers is eligible to vote, their large numbers — estimated as high as 730,000 — make them a formidable army if enough of them are recruited to volunteer for the Clinton campaign.
The term DREAMer comes from the name of a piece of failed legislation, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act). DREAM was first introduced in the Senate in 2001 and reintroduced in the 107th through 111th Congresses. It never passed both houses, but Obama was determined to implement it anyway. So on June 15, 2012, he announced that his administration would stop deporting young illegal immigrants who met certain criteria previously proposed under the DREAM Act.
The DACA program was formally initiated by a policy memorandum sent from then-Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano on June 15, 2012, to the heads of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), ordering them to practice “prosecutorial discretion” toward some individuals who were brought to this country before their 16th birthday.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson expanded DACA when on November 20, 2014 he sent an executive action memorandum to the heads of CBP, USCIS, and ICE that removed its age cap and extended work authorization to three years. Johnson’s order also expanded “deferred action” (another name for amnesty) by directing USCIS to establish a process, similar to DACA, for exercising prosecutorial discretion through the use of deferred action, on a case-by-case basis, to those individuals who have a son or daughter who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, have continuously resided in the United States since before January 1, 2010, and were physically present in the United States on the date of his memorandum, and at the time of making a request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS.
In response to that expansion of DACA, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen of the U.S. District Court in Brownsville, Texas, issued an injunction on February 16 blocking the executive action, which granted amnesty to four million illegal aliens.
The Obama administration appealed the injunction issued in the case, United States v. Texas, but following a series of subsequent appeals, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans upheld Hanen’s injunction on November 9, 2015. Soon afterwards, a DOJ spokesman stated that the administration would file a petition asking the Supreme Court to review the case, and on January 19, 2016, the High Court agreed to review the case.
The Supreme Court’s vote on June 23 was a 4-4 tie, as since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia the court is evenly divided. That tied vote lets the original decision issued by Judge Hanen and upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court stand. The court did not issue an opinion but stated simply, “The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.”
One would think that the Supreme Court’s failure to overturn Hanen’s ruling would have been the end of the programs that perpetuated amnesty for the DREAMers. However, reported Politico on June 23:
During his abruptly announced appearance in the White House briefing room [June 23], Obama said no fewer than six times that the court’s deadlock effectively killing his second round of immigration executive actions would have no impact on Round One: his 2012 move granting work permits and other benefits to millions of undocumented immigrants whose parents brought them here while they were minors.
“The deferred action policy that has been in place for the last four years is not affected by this ruling,” the president insisted. “The work that we’ve done with the DREAM Act kids, those policies remain in place…. This does not substantially change the status quo.
Such refusal to abide by the law and the courts has been typical of Obama and his underlings. And with the Clinton campaign rushing to recruit hoards of these DREAMers as volunteers, what the administration effectively has done is turn its “work with the DREAM Act kids” into a government-supported political campaign organization.
As we noted in a recent article, Clinton’s running mate, Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.), speaking during an interview with the Spanish-language TV network Telemundo on July 25, stated: “Hillary is going to [push for immigration reform] in the first 100 days of her administration.” As part of that “reform,” Kaine suggested that many children coming here illegally from countries such as Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala “could have a chance at asylum.”
Democrats in government have pushed for years to legalize many more illegal migrants from Latin America as a way to boost Democratic voter roles. In states where they have done so, particularly California, the states have grown increasingly “blue” and supported Democratic candidates for office.
In his talk, Kaine also touched on another area that would be greatly impacted by the outcome of the November election — the Supreme Court — and pointed out how having a Clinton-appointed justice would affect immigration:
There are a lot of people — the “Dreamers” and others — who want a path to citizenship, for example, a chance to come out of the shadows. But there’s something else we have to do: There are now eight justices on the Supreme Court. With nine justices, I think the Court would approve President Obama’s executive orders on DAPA and DACA. The Republicans are fighting the Court, because they don’t want a Court that would approve the president’s actions.
Aware that the recent tied court decision placed the status of the DREAMers in jeopardy, Kaine is using the future of the court as a talking point to urge a Clinton victory.
The practice of the Democrats to utilize illegal aliens and recently legalized Latin American immigrants to turn out votes for their candidates has been spoken of for years, but this latest campaign by the Hillary for America campaign, “Mi Sueño, Tu Voto,” makes it more apparent than ever.
The situation has progressed to the point where, unless immigration (both legal and illegal) from south of the border is brought under control, we face the distinct possibility of the Democratic Party becoming so dominant that we will effectively live in a one-party nation.