The Loophole Is Obama

the-border-crisis-is-hurting-obama-now-but-it-will-hurt-republicans-laterIt’s been reported everywhere — The New York Times, The Washington Post, Fox News — that the William Wilberforce Sex Trafficking Act requires that any non-Mexican children who show up on our border be admitted and given a hearing. (New York Times, July 7, 2014: “Immigrant Surge Rooted in Law to Curb Child Trafficking.”)

The problem, we’ve been told, is that a loophole in the sex trafficking law mandates these hearings — or “removal proceedings.”

But there is no such loophole.

The fact that people on both sides of the aisle are telling the same lie about this law is worrisome. Are Republicans being tricked into thinking we need an emergency bill, so that, two weeks later, we’ll see them emerging from a conference, saying:

We fixed the loophole! We didn’t get everything we wanted, but you can hear about that later.

No, tell me now.

Well, remember amnesty? It’s kind of in this bill. But the headline is: We closed the loophole! So no more worries about that loophole. But yeah, amnesty passed.

Why else would everyone be carrying on about a non-existent loophole? I know they’re mistaken because I read the law.

The Wilberforce law states, in relevant part:

“Any unaccompanied alien child sought to be removed by the Department of Homeland Security, except for an unaccompanied alien child from a contiguous country (i.e. Mexico — or Canada, so as not to sound discriminatory) … shall be — placed in removal proceedings … eligible for relief … at no cost to the child and provided access to counsel.”

Obviously, that’s the whole ball of wax. Once a kid is in, given La Raza attorneys and a hearing date, he’s never going home. No immigration judge is going to listen to a lawyer-manufactured sob story and say, “No, I’m sorry, that didn’t touch my heart. You have to go back to Huehuetenango.”

But the law’s definition of “unaccompanied alien child” limits the hearings to kids who have no relatives in the United States. If your relatives live here, the law assumes you’re not being sex-trafficked — you’re trying to join them.

Here’s the definition — note subsection (C):

“(g) Definitions

“(2) the term ‘unaccompanied alien child’ means a child who —

(A) has no lawful immigration status in the United States;

(B) has not attained 18 years of age; and

(C) with respect to whom —

(i) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States; or (ii) no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.”

The law is not — as George Will suggested on “Fox News Sunday” — a general humanitarian mandate allowing all 2 billion poor children of the world to show up at our border and be told, “Welcome to America!” It’s a law to combat sex trafficking.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Vice President Joe Biden wrote the law — and Feinstein isn’t stupid. She’s well aware of illegal immigration. That’s why the law specifically excludes two huge categories of illegal aliens from getting hearings: (1) Mexicans; and (2) children who have relatives in the U.S.

Those cases look more like illegal immigration than sex trafficking. (Didn’t anyone wonder why Mexican kids are excluded?)

Mexicans make up the lion’s share of illegal immigrants in the U.S., and children with relatives already living in the U.S. are probably just trying to rejoin family — not trying to escape a fiendish kidnapper about to sell them into sex slavery.

According to last Friday’s New York Times, almost 90 percent of the 53,000 illegal alien kids given refugee status since October have already been transferred to parents or relatives living in the U.S. By the law’s clear terms, those 47,000 kids should have been summarily turned away at the border — just as Mexican children are.

(Democrats wailing about a “humanitarian” crisis — after calculating the precise number of voters they need — evidently don’t care about the Mexican kids.)

No law needs to be fixed. The only thing that needs to be fixed is the president.

Obama has gone mad and is defying the law in order to “fundamentally transform America” — as he pledged to do during the 2008 campaign — into Latin America. (Luckily for George Will, he won’t be around by the time Latin America gets to his neighborhood.)

Any Republicans pushing for an immigration bill to seal an imaginary loophole aren’t fighting Obama; they’re helping him.

Constitutionally, the remedy for a president defying the law so he can assist an alien invasion is impeachment. But the media won’t let us impeach Obama — and Republicans don’t have the votes, anyway. The only way for Americans to fight back is to put large Republican majorities in the House and Senate this November.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • BMS

    It is so clear that Obama hates what he believes is:”WHITE” America. He wants to change the demographics of this country That has been his goal since taking office. Everyone eligible to vote in November should vote to get the Democrats out of office. As a former Democrat I believed the party was for the working man. Somehow the left took over that party and they are now the party of the non-working man. I hope Americans vote to TAKE BACK AMERICA before it’s to late and the country we all loved is just a memory.

    • Ginger Li

      “It is so clear that Obama hates what he believes is:”WHITE” America.” No matter what he does, he’ll never change the fact that he’s a mulatto – the white just won’t come out.

      • Crassus

        Or it could be that Obama hates the fact that he’ll never be accepted as white despite having a white mother and is acting accordingly.

    • Sheik Yerbouti

      He’s screwing black Americans more with this. He hates America entirely. The blacks who voted for him were fooled utterly by this imposter. Not surprising when you vote on skin color alone. Obama has no “slave babies” in his lineage. Which is why he has no sympathy for black Americans. They are just as disposable to him as the white ones.

  • andrewjwilliam

    til I looked at the receipt which had said $7907 , I
    accept that my friend was like actualey receiving money in their spare time at
    there computar. . there moms best frend haz done this for only about 1 year and
    as of now repayed the mortgage on there cottage and purchased a great Alfa
    Romeo . visit homepage J­a­m­2­0­.­C­O­M­

  • Theodore

    ‘The fact that people on both sides of the aisle are telling the same lie about this law is worrisome.’

    George Carlin: “Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out.”

    • Edward E

      Why do genocidal anti-Whites keep using the word, It is not “freedom”, it is geNOcide.

      ONLY White people are NOT allowed to say NO! to this MASS foreign race
      immigration and FORCED integration/assimilation to create some “blended

      “Anti-racists” FORCE EVERY & -ONLY- White countries to take in MASS foreign race immigration.

      If we are not allowed to say no, that is NOT freedom.

      That is FORCING and it’s White geNOcide.

      Anti-racist is a >codeword< for anti-White

  • cjjeepercreeper

    “Constitutionally, the remedy for a president defying the law so he can assist an alien invasion is impeachment.”

    Alien invasion. That is treason. Penalty for treason is a lengthy term in prison up to death.

  • Marco

    So who went down to Central America to spread lies about a phony loophole in the law?

  • Bob Sten

    Reagan began by nailing something like five million nails in the coffin for the republican party when he supported amnesty for mexican border hoppers.

    Then clinton put in a few million more nails in the republican coffin when he granted amnesty to mexican border hoppers.

    Mexican border hoppers are takers. They take more than they contribute. Financially, they are a net loss for the nation. They support big government (dummocrats) because they are needy and take. They make very little on average, and use lots of services (education for their hordes of kids, health care, the prisons in the southwest are filled with mexicans, etc.)

    Republicans are for small government and personal responsibility (for the most part). Border hopping takers don’t want small government, they want free bread and circuses. It doesn’t matter if republicans support amnesty, they won’t get mexican votes. If this amnesty goes through, the republican party is finished in this country.

    It’s not finished because they don’t support illegal immigration. It’s finished because their small government policies are the antithesis of what these border hopping takers want.

    • Ginger Li

      Milton Friedman, the anti-Keynesian classical economist, famously said that open borders immigration and the welfare state are incompatible and unsustainable for any country. This country is in the process of proving that and no amount of denial will change that fact. The denial comes mostly from the republican party in that the left (democrats) certainly want it to happen according to the precepts of the Cloward Piven theory of social upheaval. In such a circumstance, the liberal fascists have every reason to believe they will do best in the struggle to seize total power

      The republican party collaborating quislings figure to be treated as special guests for their part in betraying and delivering the country into the hands of the fascists.

      There’s no doubt this is what the left wants and will get in a country flooded with third world poor people. The value the citizen vote will be reduced to worthless as they are reduced to state serfs…and join the permanent underclass. A fascist state of elitist privilege is what will remain.

      The crucial battle for their very future is being fought at the southern border – and in DC – with the nation’s sovereignty at stake. And the American people instinctively know this.

      • Bob Sten

        Excellent post ginger. I am really surprised that so many big businesses support amnesty. They “think” what they are getting is “cheap” labor, but what they will be getting will not end up being so cheap.

        They will end up having these border hoppers vote in far left wing tax and spenders (because the border hoppers are overwhelmingly needy), thus, these businesses will end up with much higher tax rates.

        The long term will be bleak for businesses and their tax rates.

        • Ginger Li

          Sorry it has taken so long to respond. Unfortunately, businesses pass all their costs, ultimately, onto consumers. This affects their competitive position in the market and contributes to further inflation of the currency.

          • Bob Sten

            inflation that the FED completely ignores….

            I despise the FED