DACA, Amnesty and the Statute of Limitations

A very intelligent friend (he's a real rocket scientist) posted on Facebook, attempting to reframe the description of allowing people who entered the U.S. illegally to remain as something other than amnesty.

"Some people seem to be hung up on the concept of "amnesty" for unlawful immigration. What if we call it "statute of limitations" instead ? There's plenty of precedent for the idea that you don't prosecute people for minor crimes, or even some felonies, after enough years have gone by. Congress could establish a federal statute of limitations for violating immigration laws. Maybe five years?"

As pointed out by University of North Texas Assistant Law Professor Brian Owsley (a former federal magistrate judge) in an excellent essay on the topic, there already is a statute of limitations for violations of Title 8, United States Code, § 1325.  It is five years.  But the statute does not begin to toll until the date that the person in the U.S. illegally is "discovered" by the federal government. 

A memo issued by Department of Homeland Security in November of 2014 involving the expansion of DACA pointed out that "...Deferred action in one form or another dates back to the 1960s.  Deferred action per se dates back at least as far as 1975."  From the moment that DACA was put into place, it was made clear that it was a temporary deferral of action against those "protected" by the executive order, and not meant to be permanent.

Because those who are in favor of mass deportation of anyone in the U.S. illegally would claim that the presence of someone who did not enter illegally is an ongoing crime; establishing a five year statute of limitations solely for illegal entry would not work.  Those same naysayers would say that any attempt to use statute of limitations to replace amnesty would be nothing more than semantics.

There is no question that punishing children for being brought here when they were too young to be held responsible for how they entered this country is wrong.  The problem is, that under the law as it currently exists, there is no way for those people to find a path to permanent residency/citizenship while remaining in the U.S.

The argument that those here illegally are not paying taxes and making contributions to the economy is ridiculous.  Whether they work using a "fake" Social Security number or under the table, the money they earn is returned to the economy.  As long as Plyer v Doe and EMTALA is the law of the land, education and emergent medical care are going to be provided to everyone without regard to the legality of their presence in the United States.

What is needed is not a work-around or an executive order.  DACA was never meant to be a long-term solution.  It ignores the reality that while the numbers appear to be smaller these days, people are still coming into our country in violation of the immigration laws.  We need true reform of the system that addresses both those who are here, and those who want desperately to come here.

That would be just one step in the right direction.  Immigration reform is only one area of concern.  As long as we have the vast level of income inequality within our borders, and continue to focus on stock market growth for the wealthy at the expense of the poor, our nation is in serious trouble.