Here’s Chuck Grassley’s Real Problem With the Use of Executive Authority on Immigration

Barack Obama’s not George W. Bush.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) speaks to members of the press at the Senate Daily Press Gallery June 27, 2013 at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Lucia Graves
See more stories about...
Lucia Graves
May 7, 2014, 9:09 a.m.

Yes­ter­day, when the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion un­veiled a num­ber of pro­pos­als that would re­lax re­stric­tions on for­eign work­ers and their spouses, Chuck Grass­ley was all verklempt.

“The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion claims it wants im­mig­ra­tion re­form, but they can’t wait for Con­gress. They act on their own,” Grass­ley, a top Re­pub­lic­an on the Sen­ate Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee, said on the Sen­ate floor, ac­cord­ing to his pre­pared re­marks. “What’s next? Will the pres­id­ent uni­lat­er­ally leg­al­ize the un­doc­u­mented pop­u­la­tion be­cause he can’t have his way with Con­gress?”

Grass­ley’s feel­ing that the pres­id­ent is over­step­ping his powers in re­vamp­ing im­mig­ra­tion policy via ex­ec­ut­ive ac­tion is something of a change of heart. Back in June of 2008, when Pres­id­ent George W. Bush used an ex­ec­ut­ive or­der to re­quire fed­er­al con­tract­ors to par­ti­cip­ate in the Home­land Se­cur­ity De­part­ment’s E-Veri­fy sys­tem, Grass­ley was all for it.

Ap­pear­ing on CNN’s Lou Dobbs To­night sev­er­al days after the an­nounce­ment in 2008, Grass­ley voiced his sup­port for Bush’s ac­tion, say­ing, “It’s so im­port­ant that the pres­id­ent do that,” since Grass­ley would have put something sim­il­ar in le­gis­la­tion of his own if the pres­id­ent hadn’t. “It’s quite a vic­tory to get it done by ex­ec­ut­ive,” Grass­ley said at the time.

Grass­ley de­serves points for ideo­lo­gic­al con­sist­ency on im­mig­ra­tion, and his of­fice ar­gues that the situ­ation was dif­fer­ent — that there was clear au­thor­ity in the law for every em­ploy­er to use E-Veri­fy, in­clud­ing the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment. “Pres­id­ent Obama’s ex­ec­ut­ive or­ders, on pro­sec­utori­al dis­cre­tion for H-1Bs for ex­ample, fall, in Sen­at­or Grass­ley’s opin­ion, out­side the con­stric­tions of ex­ist­ing law,” his spokes­wo­man, Beth Lev­ine, wrote in an email. “Sen­at­or Grass­ley wishes the pres­id­ent would use his ex­ec­ut­ive au­thor­ity to be­ne­fit Amer­ic­an work­ers, in­stead of work­ing to their det­ri­ment.” Bush, the lo­gic goes, was merely re­quir­ing what the law already au­thor­ized.

The up­shot though, was that Bush took a law Con­gress es­tab­lished as a vol­un­tary sys­tem in 1996 and greatly ex­pan­ded the pro­gram’s reach, af­fect­ing at least sev­er­al hun­dred thou­sand work­ers a year na­tion­wide, ac­cord­ing to The New York Times‘ es­tim­ates. The real dif­fer­ence then, was that Obama’s pro­pos­al uses ex­ec­ut­ive au­thor­ity to make life a little easi­er for for­eign work­ers, and Bush was us­ing it to do something Grass­ley agrees with. It would be­hoove Grass­ley to just say so.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
2 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
3 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×