Of course he can reverse it administratively. The judge made clear no new DACA applicants need be accepted. The issue is what to do with those who've come forward and put their asses on the line in good faith reliance on the program.
First, I happen to support a narrow version. (end ALL chain migration). We only admit those who will benefit America and citizens, NOT people that will go on public support. We have too many of those already.
But the way things usually go it will be overly broad.
But as to the point that persons are owed anything, in exchange for having "put their asses on the line" leaves me confused. (their parents "put all of their asses on the line" when they snuck in and stayed)
Obama's full intention was to hogtie Congress and future Presidents into a policy he could not get the votes for. IOW he sought to override the will of voters.
Who's interest holds the most importance? Illegal immigrants, or American citizen voters?
On the entire subject of illegal immigration, time after time, the Left try to elevate the standing of illegal immigrants, above American citizen voters.
The only reason the Left opposes the Wall, is to ensure more illegal immigrants can get in. They do NOT oppose it over cost, or because it is ineffective.
Can't we simply be honest? Can't the American citizen voter have top billing, in his own country ?
I "put my ass on the line" serving in the military. I would think my interests would be greater/higher than any illegal immigrant.
Obama's measure was administrative, temporary. Why should it grant permanent standing? Why wouldn't return travel to the Mexican interior be enough in exchange for them having "put their asses on the line?"
Why do we owe them anything? What have they done beyond existing here, to justify anything whatsoever?
