Immigration Policy Won’t Make It Into the Defense Bill, for Now

House conservatives are blocking a plan to grant legal status to military “Dreamers.”

Lizardo Buleje of San Antonio, Texas, stands in front of the U.S. Capitol during a rally on immigration reform October 23, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Elahe Izad
Add to Briefcase
Elahe Izad
April 4, 2014, 10:26 a.m.

A push by some Re­pub­lic­ans to in­clude lan­guage in a must-pass de­fense bill to grant leg­al status to “Dream­ers” in the mil­it­ary has hit a snag amid vo­cal op­pos­i­tion from a sub­set of House con­ser­vat­ives.

The pro­pos­al, stem­ming from a bill sponsored by Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Jeff Den­ham of Cali­for­nia, will not be in­cluded in the Na­tion­al De­fense Au­thor­iz­a­tion Act, House Armed Ser­vices Chair­man Buck McK­eon an­nounced Fri­day. McK­eon is a co­spon­sor of the Den­ham bill.

“I have reached this con­clu­sion without re­gard to my views on the un­der­ly­ing policy, but be­cause I do not be­lieve that the Chair­man’s mark should be the ori­gin­al ven­ue for this de­bate,” McK­eon said in a state­ment. “Over the past sev­er­al days I have heard from mem­bers on and off the com­mit­tee on both sides of this is­sue. They have made sound ar­gu­ments and raised val­id con­cerns…. This is an im­port­ant is­sue that I know will con­tin­ue to be de­bated go­ing for­ward.”

Con­sid­er­a­tion of in­clud­ing the im­mig­ra­tion-re­lated pro­vi­sion in the NDAA bill, which would pre­vent mem­bers from vot­ing on it as a stand-alone bill, was first re­por­ted by Breit­bart News. It would al­low im­mig­rants brought here il­leg­ally when they were 15 or young­er and who then went on to serve in the mil­it­ary to qual­i­fy for per­man­ent res­id­ency. The pos­sib­il­ity of in­clud­ing it in the NDAA bill in­spired a back­lash from im­mig­ra­tion hard-liners, such as Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama, who is cir­cu­lat­ing a “Dear Col­league” let­ter about it.

Brooks said in­clud­ing it in the de­fense bill “may stop the pas­sage of the NDAA by bring­ing in an ex­tra­cur­ricular is­sue that is wholly un­re­lated to na­tion­al se­cur­ity.”

On the bill it­self, Brooks said “it en­sures il­leg­al ali­ens will be put on the same foot­ing with Amer­ic­an cit­izens who are com­pet­ing for en­list­ment priv­ileges in our na­tion­al de­fense.”

But the pro­vi­sion isn’t dead yet. A House Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee mem­ber can still in­tro­duce it in com­mit­tee. (Den­ham isn’t a mem­ber.) And if that doesn’t hap­pen, Den­ham has said he will in­tro­duce it in the House Rules Com­mit­tee as an amend­ment to NDAA.

“It’s very frus­trat­ing to see con­tro­versy on an is­sue from mem­bers who have nev­er served our coun­try and don’t un­der­stand the im­pacts that im­mig­rants have had on se­cur­ing our freedoms and se­cur­ing our na­tion­al free­dom,” Den­ham said.

When asked about that cri­ti­cism, Brooks re­spon­ded, “That’s bunk. Next ques­tion.”

This is­sue came up last year, but Den­ham with­drew con­sid­er­a­tion of the bill on the floor as House Ju­di­ciary Com­mit­tee Chair­man Bob Good­latte raised ob­jec­tions that his com­mit­tee had jur­is­dic­tion over such is­sues. Den­ham won’t be do­ing the same thing again, he said.

“I was con­fid­ent last year that I had the votes on my amend­ment, and I was will­ing to work with my con­fer­ence on the is­sue,” Den­ham said. “I’m con­fid­ent that my bill, as a stand-alone bill, will have over­whelm­ing sup­port of both con­fer­ences.”

The bill cur­rently has 42 co­spon­sors: 18 Demo­crats and 24 Re­pub­lic­ans.

What We're Following See More »
CITES CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Lieberman Withdraws from Consideration for FBI Job
1 days ago
THE LATEST
MINIMUM 2 PERCENT GDP
Trump Tells NATO Countries To Pay Up
2 days ago
BREAKING
MANAFORT AND FLYNN
Russians Discussed Influencing Trump Through Aides
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

"American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers." The conversations centered around Paul Manafort, who was campaign chairman at the time, and Michael Flynn, former national security adviser and then a close campaign surrogate. Both men have been tied heavily with Russia and Flynn is currently at the center of the FBI investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Source:
BUT WHITE HOUSE MAY USE AGAINST HIM ANYWAY
Ethics Cops Clear Mueller to Work on Trump Case
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"Former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been cleared by U.S. Department of Justice ethics experts to oversee an investigation into possible collusion between then-candidate Donald Trump's 2016 election campaign and Russia." Some had speculated that the White House would use "an ethics rule limiting government attorneys from investigating people their former law firm represented" to trip up Mueller's appointment. Jared Kushner is a client of Mueller's firm, WilmerHale. "Although Mueller has now been cleared by the Justice Department, the White House may still use his former law firm's connection to Manafort and Kushner to undermine the findings of his investigation, according to two sources close to the White House."

Source:
BUSINESSES CAN’T PLEAD FIFTH
Senate Intel to Subpoena Two of Flynn’s Businesses
3 days ago
THE LATEST

Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) and ranking member Mark Warner (D-VA) will subpoena two businesses owned by former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Burr said, "We would like to hear from General Flynn. We'd like to see his documents. We'd like him to tell his story because he publicly said he had a story to tell."

×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login