Jan Brewer Blames Obama for Her Loss on Anti-DACA Driver's License Policy
Governor Jan Brewer responded to her loss in federal court yesterday, which put a temporary ban on her executive order preventing participants in the Obama Administration's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program from receiving driver's licenses.
Somehow, this is all President Obama's fault, according to Brewer.
Brewer released a statement saying, in part:
"In 2012, based on President Obama's lawless directive, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) made an administrative policy choice to defer removal proceedings of illegal aliens who were brought to the United States as children, a program referred to as DACA. This policy choice is not federal law authorizing an illegal alien's presence in the country - it simply is a choice by the executive branch not to enforce deportation proceedings as required under existing federal statute.
Interestingly, the opinion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals says the opposite:
The federal government has enacted a program called "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" ("DACA"), which authorizes certain immigrants who came to the United States as children, without permission, to remain in the United States.
Brewer explained the move was to prevent "illegal people" from getting driver's licenses, but her ban didn't include other non-citizens who are allowed to get Arizona driver's licenses.
The lower court didn't grant an injunction against the policy, however, the federal judge noted that the plaintiffs did have a good likelihood of succeeding in their claim that the policy violates the constitutional right of equal protection.
Faced with this, Brewer's administration then revised the policy, extending the ban to more non-citizens, although they'd previously been able to obtain a license without any such trouble from Brewer.
The initial policy barring DACA participants from getting Arizona driver's licenses is likely where the Brewer administration goofed on this matter.
Attorneys for the state used arguments similar to Brewer's -- that their presence being authorized by the federal government somehow doesn't count, compared to other non-citizens who have been granted deferred action through other, longer-standing programs, and who've had no issue getting an Arizona driver's license, until now.
The opinion from the appeals court pane sums up the response to that argument succinctly: "Arizona's attempt at rationalizing this discrimination fails."
As if that weren't enough, Brewer's statement also includes the following pound of sliced baloney:
"The DACA Program, the decision to not enforce federal law, has directly led to the massive influx of illegal crossings and the crisis we are witnessing today. If the Ninth Circuit ruling is allowed to stand, the President, as he has already threatened, can contrive a new program refusing to deport the latest arrivals, issue employment authorization cards, and Arizona would have to issue licenses to them as well.
Now, read Rule No. 3 for qualifying for DACA:
3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
So, according to Brewer, children from Central America are showing up to the nation's southern border because a program exists that defers the deportation of people who showed up in the country seven years ago. Something to do with time machines, or something.
More from Brewer:
Lawless decrees by the President demonstrate animus to Congress, states and the Constitution.
Again, whose decree has been halted by a federal court? (Also, who else would give 5 bucks to have Brewer to try to say that sentence out loud?)
This continues us down a dangerous path in which the courts and the President - not Congress - make our nation's laws. The ruling is especially disturbing given the current influx of illegal aliens, a crisis President Obama created and escalated. I am analyzing options for appealing the misguided court decision. The American people are tired and disgusted by what is happening through our federal government today, but they can be assured Arizona will continue to fight for the rule of law."
And again, we note that this is a directive Brewer took without authorization of the Legislature, and according to this appellate court, Brewer didn't follow the rule of law.
"Plaintiffs have shown that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their equal protection claim, that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm unless Defendants' policy is enjoined, and that both the balance of the equities and the public interest favor an injunction," the opinion states.
Got a tip? Send it to: Matthew Hendley.
Get the This Week's Top Stories Newsletter
Every week we collect the latest news, music and arts stories — along with film and food reviews and the best things to do this week — so that you'll never miss Phoenix New Times' biggest stories.