Category Archives: illegal immigration

Crime Does Pay…Illegals With Three Kids Will Collect $35,000

Isn’t this just lovely.  Those of us who have worked hard and been good citizens all our lives, and have paid our taxes for the VERY FEW things the Constitution allows the Congress to spend our dollars on, are now being raped to support law breakers and invaders.  This is absolutely unconscionable.  Write your congress criminal and get a letter back that says nothing and makes no sense whatsoever.  Call them up and what do you get?  Pablum that is spewed from the mealy mouths of the so-called representative’s aides.

I certainly am not happy about the thousands we send to DC every year being spent in this fashion.  I know many Mexicans who have come to this country legally and they are not happy about this invasion either.  Where can I sign up to be an illegal and collect tax dollars of the working Americans?  And by the way, the amount of working Americans is dwindling every day.

free-money

Posted on February 27, 2015 by Steven Ahle on DC Clothline

The old adage that says “Crime Doesn’t Pay” is no longer operable. Illegal aliens who have invaded the country will be the beneficiaries of your tax dollars once their work permits and Social Security cards are approved. The IRS in their infinite wisdom (My tongue is planted firmly in my cheek) has decided that illegal aliens will be able to collect a fortune from US taxpayers even though they haven’t paid a penny in taxes themselves. A family of three would be eligible for just over $35,000.

It’s bad enough that these criminals are allowed to stay here against duly passed and signed laws of the land because some American hating SOB in the White House decides to scrap the constitution and US law.

The IRS has determined that these illegal aliens can take advantage of both the Child Tax Credit (CTC) (1,000 per child) and the EITC. (Earned Income Tax Credit) A family with three children earning $22,000 per year would be eligible for the maximum amount of $35,521. Nice non work if you can find it. I wonder if I went to the immigration office, if they would let me apply for illegal status. Free money, free education, free housing, free abortions, free medical, free electricity, free food, free education. And now free tax refunds.

Sens. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Ben Sasse (R-NE) wrote to Barry and objected to what they called amnesty bonuses:

“This is basic economics: if you want more of something, you subsidize it. By subsidizing illegal entry with four years’ worth of new tax credits, the IRS would promote lawlessness,” Sasse said in a statement at the time. “This program severely undermines the White House’s lip-service to enforcing the law and would increase the burden on law-abiding taxpayers.”

Courtesy of Red Statements.

Stop being nice to America-destroying Left

Conservatives, including me, like to blame Obama for everything that’s wrong with America.

But the truth is he wouldn’t be in the White House, ignoring and bypassing Congress by signing more executive orders and memoranda than any U.S. president in history:

  • without MILLIONS of Americans voting him into power, twice!
  • without the willful complicity of the establishment media
  • without the gutless spineless Republicans, and
  • without the approval of MILLIONS of Americans (50% of adults, according to Gallup Poll, still!), despite or because of everything he’s done.

To quote 18th century French diplomat Count Joseph Marie Maistre (1763-1821), “Every nation has the government it deserves.”

In the following op/ed by Michael Cummings for Clash Daily, he perfectly articulates my sentiments.

america_divided

Tired of Losing: No More ‘Benefit of the Doubt’, Decorum for America-Destroying Leftists

Ben Shapiro, attorney, author of Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America, and Brietbart.com editor-at-large, said in a recent column:

“If someone calls you a racist, and you respond by stating that they are a reasonable human being with policy differences, you grant their premise: A reasonable person has called you a racist, which means it is reasonable to call you racist. You lose.”

I am tired of losing.

I am tired of giving people on the Left the benefit of the doubt. Is it not clear they do not mean well? Is it not clear they don’t want the same things as we? Is it not clear they do not wish to arrive at the same destination via a different path? These people are not on our side, and were I in Congress I would not call any member of the opposition party “My honorable friend” or “esteemed colleague.” Decorum be damned.

In the last week we’ve seen former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani get criticized on every news show over his statement that he didn’t think Barack Obama loves America. True Americans cheered as Giuliani didn’t back down when challenged over the days that followed. Even Scott Walker, when asked about what Rudy said of Obama, essentially said, “Ask Obama.” Well done, both of you.

We need more of this, more of calling these people out.

And why shouldn’t we? Barack Obama has done more damage to this country than any president or elected official. We need to tell the truth.

  • He and his perpetually angry wife criticized our country during the 2008 campaign.
  • He began his administration with a trip around the world to apologize for every wrongdoing he believes America has committed.
  • He destroyed the best health care system in the world.
  • He pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving a gaping hole the Islamic State is only happy to fill with the blood and body parts of Jews, Christians, and not-the-right-kind-of-Muslims.
  • He traded five, high value terrorists for a proven Army deserter, some of whose fellow soldiers died looking for him.
  • He has spent more than all other presidents combined.
  • He vetoed a bipartisan bill that would allow the building of the Keystone XL Pipeline, bringing more energy independence and jobs to our nation.
  • He pushed the FCC to treat the Internet as a public utility, paving the way not just for speed but content restriction.
  • He granted de facto amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, and set processes in place to provide them tax credits and Social Security.

We know how long this list could get.

Note: Cummings left out Obama abandoning 4 Americans to die in Benghazi; the IRS singling out conservatives for extra scrutiny; the NSA spying on our every email, phonecall, and credit transaction; targeting right-wing Americans as extremist terrorists; promoting sodomy as U.S. foreign policy; imposing gun control via banning bullets by executive action; and much much more. See our “The Obama Chronicles” page.

In every facet of our lives, Barack Obama and people like him on the Left want to control us — never asking if we want to be controlled nor checking with the Constitution on the legality of their actions. Free enterprise, health care, freedom of religion, free Internet, strong military — they destroy everything they touch. In protecting America or our allies from danger, these people have made it clear they want chaos to reign.

I don’t know what else to say other than this: I hate Barack Obama. You can’t call me racist because I hate Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton, too. You can’t call me sexist because I hate Harry Reid and Dick Durbin. You can’t call me anti-pervert because I hate Joe Biden.

Do I hate these people personally? No. How could I? I know none of them. But I hate anyone who becomes part of the 1% off the freedoms of the best country this world will ever know, but with every breath they take seek to fundamentally transform it.

Do I hate these people more than the Islamic State? No, but I hold them responsible for the bloodshed painting the entire Middle East.

My hatred is bipartisan. You would like to think that since, for the moment, we still have elections, we could vote these people out and put in place principled and courageous leaders who will keep their multiple and fervent promises to stop Obama. And in 2010 and 2014 we set decades old records in political power shifting by handing Republicans the keys to Congress. Since then, Republicans have taken impeachment and funding (shutdowns) off the table. Please tell me where our negotiating power resides other than at the bottom of the pit in the movie “300.” Save for a few, patriotic stalwarts, I hate the Republicans too.

But I love God, Jesus, and the American people, and with faith in all of these I remain optimistic that while we’re in a really dark part of history, we will see the light.

Armor of God I can do all things through Christ

See also:

~Éowyn

Gun Control! Obama to ban bullets by executive action

The Piece of Sh*t occupying the White House is running amuck.

Already, he has issued more executive orders and memoranda than any U.S. president in history, the recent two amnesty executive memos being especially egregious examples. See:

Now that the Sandy Hook hoax failed to achieve its purpose of nation-wide gun control, Obama is switching his tactics by employing his executive power to ban 5.56 mm bullets used in AR-15 rifles — the most popular rifle in America.

guns-make-us-less-safe

Paul Bedard reports for The Washington Examiner, Feb. 26, 2015:

It’s starting.

As promised, President Obama is using executive actions to impose gun control on the nation, targeting the top-selling rifle in the country, the AR-15 style semi-automatic, with a ban on one of the most-used AR bullets by sportsmen and target shooters.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives this month revealed that it is proposing to put the ban on 5.56 mm ammo on a fast track, immediately driving up the price of the bullets and prompting retailers, including the huge outdoors company Cabela’s, to urge sportsmen to urge Congress to stop the president.

Wednesday night, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, stepped in with a critical letter to the bureau demanding it explain the surprise and abrupt bullet ban. The letter is shown below.

The National Rifle Association, which is working with Goodlatte to gather co-signers, told Secrets that 30 House members have already co-signed the letter and Goodlatte and the NRA are hoping to get a total of 100 fast.

“The Obama administration was unable to ban America’s most popular sporting rifle through the legislative process, so now it’s trying to ban commonly owned and used ammunition through regulation,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA-ILA, the group’s policy and lobby shop. “The NRA and our tens of millions of supporters across the country will fight to stop President Obama’s latest attack on our Second Amendment freedoms.”

At issue is so-called “armor-piercing” ammunition, an exemption for those bullets mostly used for sport by AR-15 owners, and the recent popularity of pistol-style ARs that use the ammo.

The inexpensive 5.56 M885 ammo, commonly called green tips, have been exempt for years, as have higher-caliber ammunition that also easily pierces the type of soft armor worn by police, because it’s mostly used by target shooters, not criminals. The agency proposes to reclassify it as armor-piercing and not exempt.

But now BATFE says that since the bullets can be used in semi-automatic handguns they pose a threat to police and must be banned from production, sale and use. But, as Goodlatte noted, the agency offered no proof.

Federal agencies will still be allowed to buy the ammo.

“This round is amongst the most commonly used in the most popular rifle design in America, the AR-15. Millions upon millions of M855 rounds have been sold and used in the U.S., yet ATF has not even alleged — much less offered evidence — that even one such round has ever been fired from a handgun at a police officer,” said Goodlatte’s letter.

Even some police don’t buy the administration’s claim. “Criminals aren’t going to go out and buy a $1,000 AR pistol,” Brent Ball, owner of 417 Guns in Springfield, Mo., and a 17-year veteran police officer told the Springfield News-Leader. “As a police officer I’m not worried about AR pistols because you can see them. It’s the small gun in a guy’s hand you can’t see that kills you.”

Many see the bullet ban as an assault on the AR-15 and Obama’s back-door bid to end production and sale.

“We are concerned,” said Justin Anderson with Hyatt Gun Shop in Charlotte, N.C., one of the nation’s top sellers of AR-15 style rifles. “Frankly, we’re always concerned when the government uses back-door methods to impose quasi-gun control.”

Groups like the National Shooting Sports Foundation suggest that under BATFE’s new rule, other calibers like popular deer hunting .308 bullets could be banned because they also are used in AR-15s, some of which can be turned into pistol-style guns. “This will have a detrimental effect on hunting nationwide,” said the group.

not for hunting

For all the posts FOTM has published on the Sandy Hook hoax, go here.

~Éowyn

Homeland Security chief says we should “give voice to the plight of Muslims” as Obama administration opens immigration floodgates to Muslims

heads in sand

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a cabinet-level department of the federal government which is charged with the primary responsibilities of protecting the United States and its territories from and responding to terrorist attacks, man-made accidents, and natural disasters.

Like his boss, King Merde in the White House, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson also adamantly refuses to call the Islamic State “Islamic” or a “state.”

Even a Democratic member of Congress, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), openly disagrees with the Obama administration’s ostrich-like denial. Beginning at the 2:54 mark in the video below, Gabbard says:

“Unless you accurately identify who your enemy is, then you can’t come up with an offensive strategy, a winning strategy, to defeat that enemy.”

Worse than his denial, at the recent 3-day White House summit on violent extremism that began with an opening prayer by an imam, Sheikh Sa’ad Musse Roble of the Minneapolis’ World Peace [sic] Organization, Johnson actually said (00:10 mark in the CSPAN video that you can view here):

We in the administration, in government, should give voice to the plight of Muslims living in this country and the discrimination that they face.

How come Obama isn’t giving voice to the plight of “right-wing” Americans, especially sovereign citizens, but instead identifies those Americans as “extremist terrorists”? (See “Obama downplays blood-thirsty ISIS but targets right-wing Americans as extremist terrorists“)

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is opening the floodgates to foreign Muslims.

Paul Sperry reports for Investor’s Business Daily, Feb. 19, 2015, that between 2010 and 2013, the Obama administration imported almost 300,000 new immigrants from Muslim nations — more (legal) immigrants than the U.S. let in from Central America and Mexico combined over that period.

Many of the recent Muslim immigrants are from terrorist hot spots like Iraq, where the Islamic State operates. From 2010-2013, Obama ushered in 41,094 Iraqi nationals from there.

Now the State Department says it will quadruple the number of refugees brought here from Syria, where ISIS is headquartered. The U.S. will admit as many as 2,000 Syrian nationals by the end of fiscal year 2015, up from 525 since fiscal 2011.

This is a sea change in immigration flows, and it threatens national security. But the threat Muslim immigrants pose to homeland security was not addressed during the White House summit on terrorism. Instead, VPOS Joe Biden assured Muslim groups gathered during one session of the summit that the “wave” of Muslim immigration is “not going to stop.”

H/t Clash Daily

~Éowyn

Obama emergency order to restart amnesty in defiance of federal judge Hanen

Obama gives America the finger

This creature in the White House really must be the devil himself.

Mike Lillis reports for The Hill, Feb. 20, 2015, that the Department of Justice (DOJ) plans to seek an emergency stay that would essentially undo U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen‘s injunction from earlier this week. If the stay is granted, the government could restart a pair of amnesty executive memoranda that will shield millions of illegals from deportation.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said DOJ will file for the stay by “Monday at the latest.”

The emergency stay had been sought by “immigrant rights” advocates like head of the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) Marielena Hincapié, who want to get the programs up and running as soon as possible while the appeals process plays out.

Marielena Hincapie
Making good on earlier vows, DOJ will also file a separate appeal seeking to restart the executive programs. Earnest said, “We will seek that appeal because we believe when you evaluate the legal merits of the arguments, that there is a solid legal foundation for the president to take the steps he announced last year to help reform our immigration system.”

At issue are two new initiatives launched unilaterally by Obama on Nov. 20:

  • The first expands eligibility for Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which halts deportations and allows work permits for certain undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children.
  • The second, known as DAPA, would extend similar benefits to the parents of U.S. citizens and permanent legal residents.

Combined, the programs could affect as many as 5 million immigrants living in the country illegally.

Republicans are seeking to stop both of Obama’s executive actions in a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security, but the bill has been blocked repeatedly by Senate Democrats, raising the possibility of a partial government shutdown next week.

Rep. Lamar Smith, a Republican from Texas and former Judiciary Committee chairman, ripped Obama’s request for an emergency stay, saying it’s “no surprise that the most partisan and imposing Department of Justice of our time would rush to defend the president’s lawless actions. Putting a stop to these overreaching executive actions isn’t about Republicans or Democrats; it’s about respecting and restoring the rule of law. This is why it’s even more important that Senate Democrats stop playing politics with the Constitution and stop blocking House legislation that would halt the president’s executive overreach.”

Many states have objected to Obama’s policies as well. Texas and 25 other states have filed a lawsuit contending the programs marked an abuse of executive authority that would cripple their budgets with exorbitant new costs.

It is that lawsuit that prompted Judge Hanen’s ruling announced near midnight last Monday to put a temporary halt on Obama’s amnesty so as to give the lawsuit the time to be heard. Hanen has not yet ruled on the merits of the states’ complaints, but said they have a significant enough case that both the DAPA and expanded DACA programs should be put on hold until the legal challenges are resolved.

The effects of the decision were immediate, as administration officials quickly announced that they would not begin accepting applications for either program until the court decisions are final. Before the ruling, the Homeland Security Department was poised to begin accepting applications for the expanded-DACA program this week, and the for the DAPA program in May. Both have been suspended indefinitely.

Hanen’s injunction does not affect the original DACA program, which remains up and running.

Gil Kerlikowske

Meanwhile, Judge Hanen’s decision is being ignored by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that is charged with border enforcement.

In an email sent to CBP agents on Wednesday, CBP Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske ordered border agents to continue the relaxed border enforcement guidelines that accompanied Obama’s executive amnesty. (National Review)

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV

See also:

~Éowyn

Federal judge stops Obama’s executive amnesty for illegals

king

To get around accusations that he bypasses Congress by issuing too many executive orders (195 at last count), Obama slyly resorts to the lesser-known presidential or executive memorandum instead, which has the same force of law as executive orders. In fact, analysis shows that Obama has issued more executive memos, numbering 198, than any U.S. president in history.

Unlike executive orders, executive memoranda are not numbered or indexed and therefore, until recently, difficult to quantify. As a result, executive memos have gone largely unexamined, despite the fact they often are as significant to everyday Americans than executive orders. (See “Obama has issued more executive orders than any U.S. president in history“)

In Obama’s case, some of the most significant actions of his presidency have come not by executive order but by presidential memoranda, notably his two executive memos last November which confer effective amnesty by refusing to deport as many as five million people who are in the U.S. illegally. Those memos are:

  1. An executive memo that expand a program that protects young immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the U.S. illegally as children. This is set to start taking effect tomorrow.
  2. An executive memo, to begin on May 19, which extends deportation protections to parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country illegally for some years.

The problem, as noted by Wikipedia, is there is no constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive actions like executive orders, executive or presidential memoranda, presidential determinations, and presidential notices. Instead, presidents look to the term “executive power” in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which refers to the title of President as the executive, as well as Article II, Section 3, Clause 5’s instruction that the President “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” else he faces impeachment. Most executive orders therefore use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President’s sworn duties and powers as the nation’s chief executive.

All of which means that the legitimacy of executive orders, executive memos, and other executive actions is open to interpretation and dispute.

In the case of Obama’s two executive memoranda conferring effective amnesty on illegal aliens in the United States, their constitutionality is being challenged in the courts, no thanks to the supine members of Congress who actually are charged by the U.S. Constitution to make laws.

Judge Arthur J. Schwab

Judge Arthur J. Schwab

Last December, federal judge Arthur J. Schwab of the Western District of Pennsylvania, used a deportation decision to probe the constitutionality of Obama’s amnesty memorandum and declared it “unconstitutional.” Judge Schwab wrote:

President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional.

Judge Schwab’s full decision here.

Judge Andrew Hanen

Judge Andrew Hanen

Yesterday, Feb. 16, 2015, another federal judge, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen, took it one important step further by temporarily blocking Obama’s amnesty so as to give a coalition of 26 states time to pursue a lawsuit that aims to permanently stop the orders. (My Way News)

Judge Hanen wrote in a memorandum accompanying his order that the lawsuit should go forward and that without a preliminary injunction the states will “suffer irreparable harm in this case” because “The genie would be impossible to put back into the bottle” once Obama’s amnesty memoranda are put into effect. The presence of millions of illegals aliens would then be sanctioned, which would be a “virtually irreversible” action.

The coalition of states, led by Texas and made up of mostly conservative states in the South and Midwest, argues that Obama has violated the “Take Care Clause” of the U.S. Constitution, which they say limits the scope of presidential power. They also say the order will force increased investment in law enforcement, health care and education.

In their request for the injunction, the coalition said it was necessary because it would be “difficult or impossible to undo the President’s lawlessness after the Defendants start granting applications for deferred action.”

Greg Abbott

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott

In a statement late yesterday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton called Judge Hanen’s decision a “victory for the rule of law in America.” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who as the state’s former attorney general had led the state into the lawsuit, said Hanen’s decision “rightly stops the President’s overreach in its tracks.”

Andrew Hanen, who’s been on the federal court since 2002 after being nominated by President George W. Bush, regularly handles border cases but wasn’t known for being outspoken on immigration until a 2013 case. In an order in that case, Hanen suggested the Homeland Security Department should be arresting parents living in the U.S. illegally who induce their children to cross the border illegally.

Congressional Republicans have vowed to block Obama’s actions by cutting off Homeland Security Department spending for the program. Earlier this year, the Republican-controlled House passed a $39.7 billion spending bill to fund the department through the end of the budget year, but attached language to undo Obama’s executive actions. The fate of that House-passed bill is unclear as Republicans in the Senate do not have the 60-vote majority needed to advance most legislation.

Among those supporting Obama’s executive order is a group of 12 mostly liberal states, including Washington, California, and the District of Columbia. They filed a motion with Hanen in support of Obama, arguing incredibly that the directives will substantially benefit states (!) and will further the public interest (!).

A group of law enforcement officials, including the Major Cities Chiefs Association and more than 20 police chiefs and sheriffs from across the country, also filed a motion in support of Obama’s executive amnesty. They argue that amnesty will improve public safety by encouraging cooperation between police and individuals with concerns about their immigration status.

In a statement early today, the Obama White House defended his amnesty memos as within the president’s legal authority, saying that the U.S. Supreme Court and Congress have said federal officials can set priorities in enforcing immigration laws: “The district court’s decision wrongly prevents these lawful, commonsense policies from taking effect and the Department of Justice has indicated that it will appeal that decision.”

The White House is appealing Judge Hanen’s ruling. The appeal will be heard by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV and glenda

~Éowyn

Obama has issued more executive orders than any U.S. president in history

Obama signs Obamacare bill

Whenever conservatives object to the POS using Executive Orders to take unilateral action in disregard of Congress, his defenders inevitably trot out the fact that President George W. Bush had issued more Executive Orders than Obama. Indeed, as of Nov. 21, 2014, Obama has issued 194 Executive Orders, whereas George W. had signed 291 Executive Orders in the 8 years he was in office. (Wikipedia)

In so doing, the Left are merely repeating what Obama himself had said in a speech in Austin last July, “The truth is, even with all the actions I’ve taken this year, I’m issuing executive orders at the lowest rate in more than 100 years. So it’s not clear how it is that Republicans didn’t seem to mind when President Bush took more executive actions than I did.”

However, what Obama and his defenders conveniently leave out is this:

Obama, cunningly, also deploys another form of executive action known as the presidential or executive memorandum, and he has issued those memoranda more often than any other president in history.

There is no constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits either Executive Order or Executive Memorandum. Both are forms of executive orders (note the small e and o) or directives, and both have the full force of law. 

As Gregory Korte points out in a thoughtful and informative article in USA Today,  Dec. 17, 2014:

President Obama has issued a form of executive action known as the presidential memorandum more often than any other president in history — using it to take unilateral action even as he has signed fewer executive orders.

When these two forms of directives [executive orders and executive memos] are taken together, Obama is on track to take more high-level executive actions than any president since Harry Truman ….

Obama has issued executive orders to give federal employees the day after Christmas off, to impose economic sanctions and to determine how national secrets are classified. He’s used presidential memoranda to make policy on gun control, immigration and labor regulations. Tuesday, he used a memorandum to declare Bristol Bay, Alaska, off-limits to oil and gas exploration.

Like executive orders, presidential memoranda don’t require action by Congress. They have the same force of law as executive orders and often have consequences just as far-reaching. And some of the most significant actions of the Obama presidency have come not by executive order but by presidential memoranda.

Obama has made prolific use of memoranda despite his own claims that he’s used his executive power less than other presidents…. Obama has issued 195 executive orders as of Tuesday. Published alongside them in the Federal Register are 198 presidential memoranda — all of which carry the same legal force as executive orders….

Obama is not the first president to use memoranda to accomplish policy aims. But at this point in his presidency, he’s the first to use them more often than executive orders…even as he’s quietly used memoranda to signal policy changes to federal agencies….

While executive orders have become a kind of Washington shorthand for unilateral presidential action, presidential memoranda have gone largely unexamined. And yet memoranda are often as significant to everyday Americans than executive orders.

Executive Orders are numbered; Obama’s begin with #13489. Memoranda are not numbered, not indexed and, until recently, difficult to quantify.

Kenneth Lowande, a political science doctoral student at the University of Virginia, counted up memoranda published in the Code of Federal Regulations since 1945. In an article published in the December issue of Presidential Studies Quarterly, he found that memoranda appear to be replacing executive orders.

Indeed, many of Obama’s memoranda do the kinds of things previous presidents did by executive order. “If you look at some of the titles of memoranda recently, they do look like and mirror executive orders,” Lowande said. The difference may be one of political messaging in that an “executive order immediately evokes potentially damaging questions of ‘imperial overreach'” whereas memorandum sounds less threatening.

Another difference between Executive Orders and Executive Memoranda, ironically, is spelled out in an Executive Order. Executive Order 11030, signed by President Kennedy in 1962, says that an Executive Order must contain a “citation of authority,” saying what law it’s based on, but Executive Memoranda have no such requirement.

Whatever they’re called — whether executive order or executive memorandum or “presidential determination” or “presidential notice,” those executive actions are binding on future administrations unless explicitly revoked by a future president, according to legal opinion from the Justice Department.

The Office of Legal Counsel signs off on the legality of executive orders and memoranda. During the first year of Obama’s presidency, the Office of Legal Counsel asked Congress for a 14.5% budget increase, justifying its request in part by noting “the large number of executive orders and presidential memoranda that has been issued.”

Below are some examples of Obama’s executive memoranda:

• In his State of the Union Address in January 2014, Obama proposed a new retirement savings account for low-income workers called a MyRA. The next week, he issued a presidential memorandum to the Treasury Department instructing it to develop a pilot program.

• In April, Obama directed the Department of Labor to collect salary data from federal contractors and subcontractors to monitor whether they’re paying women and minorities fairly.

• In June, Obama told the Department of Education to allow certain borrowers to cap their student loan payments at 10% of income.

• Obama issued three presidential memoranda after the 2012 Sandy Hook school-shooting false flag:

  1. ordering federal law enforcement agencies to trace any firearm that’s part of a federal investigation;
  2. expanding the data available to the national background check system; and
  3. instructing federal agencies to conduct research into the causes and possible solutions to gun violence.

The most controversial Obama executive memoranda are his amnesty-to-illegals memos, which both congressional Republicans and many states say exceed his authority. Please see my post, “Federal judge stops Obama’s executive amnesty for illegals,” on the rulings of two federal judges on Obama’s amnesty executive memos.

~Éowyn