Republicans Try to Halt Obama’s Immigration Authority

House sponsor of the HALT Act, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas).<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryanjreilly/">ryanjreilly</a>/Flickr

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


A new immigration bill in Congress, the Hinder the Administration’s Legalization Temptation (HALT) Act, which a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony on yesterday, has come under fire for a variety of reasons, from its, er, unusual name to its dramatic curtailment of the executive branch’s immigration prerogatives. As the Center for American Progress points out, the law would, among other things, prohibit the Department of Homeland Security from granting a waiver for the undocumented spouse of a soldier serving overseas to temporarily remain in the US. Perhaps its most radical feature, though, is its expiration date, which just happens to be January 21, 2013—the day after Inauguration Day.

Crazy coincidence? Not a chance. In a letter to congressional colleagues (PDF), the bill’s sponsor Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) wrote, “Because of the Obama Administration’s record, it cannot be trusted with these powers.” He went on to urge, “Let’s remind the Obama Administration that the founding fathers put Congress in charge of setting the nation’s immigration policy.”

The move appears to be unprecedented: never before has Congress stripped executive powers from an incumbent administration exclusively. The closest parallel to this sort of administration-specific legislation would be the Tenure of Office Act of 1867, which the Radical Republicans passed to restrict Andrew Johnson’s authority to remove cabinet members without Congressional assent (and whose violation by Johnson served as the pretext for his impeachment). However, even that law didn’t sunset at the end of Johnson’s term and was only repealed 20 years later.

The HALT bill, of course, stands no chance of becoming law (there’s President Obama’s veto, should it come to that). Nonetheless, pursuing this legislation serves at least two purposes for Republicans, 25 of whom are HALT co-sponsors. First, hearings such as yesterday’s allow Republicans to portray the president as soft on illegal immigration, even as his administration deports record numbers of undocumented residents. Second, according to University of Pennsylvania political science professor Rogers Smith, anti-immigration advocates believe that maintaining a steady stream of legislation that says “we don’t want you and we’re going after you”—even if it doesn’t get enacted—can almost get rid of as many immigrants through attrition as actually passing those laws.

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, responded to the Republicans’ efforts with a stinging rebuke. “This is not an attack on the presidency, but an attack on the president himself,” he said yesterday. “This is not an attack on the office of the president, this is an attack on Barack Obama himself.”

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate