HERE

Below is my response to AJC editor Maureen Downey’s recent blog focused on another immigration amnesty. I am very grateful to Ms. Downey for the space.

Karen Reyes shares her story of living as an undocumented teacher and DACA recipient during a protest in support of the DREAM Act at the office of Texas Rep. Michael McCaul in Austin, Texas, on Thursday, Oct. 5, 2017. NICK WAGNER / AMERICAN-STATESMAN

Opinion: Separate DACA from DREAM Act – and put immigration enforcement first

Atlanta Journal Constitution ‘Get Schooled’ education blog
October 29, 2017

D.A. King is president of the Georgia-based Dustin Inman Society, which advocates for enforcement of immigration laws.

In this piece, King responds to a blog last week about a letter to Congress from national educational leaders beseeching Congress to provide permanent stability for young people with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or DACA status.

__

By D.A. King

In her education blog a few days ago, Maureen Downey wrote about a letter to Congress from school leaders including Georgia charter school leader and former Cobb state Rep. Alisha Morgan asking that illegal aliens with executive amnesty through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals be given a path to U.S. citizenship.

She cites passage of the proposed DREAM Act as a solution to making Americans of people brought here illegally as children by their parents. This argument creates an “apples and oranges” conversation. It is important to note the difference between DACA, an executive action under President Obama, and the amnesty outlined in the language of any possible federal DREAM Act — the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act.

According to a September United States Citizenship and Immigration Services report, there are 689,800 illegal aliens with DACA status, with 21,600 of them living in Georgia. Congressional amnesty for those 689,800 DACA recipients is far different from passage of current versions of the DREAM Act, which, according to the Migration Policy Institute, could provide legalization for more than three million illegal aliens, far more than the “one-time” Republican amnesty of 1986. (Approved under President Ronald Reagan, the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act gave a pathway to citizenship to 2.7 million undocumented people.)

The DREAM Act has failed in Congress several times since it was cooked up in 2001 because of the duplicity of its authors in hiding its true intent and the fact it was a rerun of 1986. It will be much more difficult to trick the American public on immigration amnesty again.

That said, it would make a lot of people happy to see a bargain on real enforcement for a limited, conditional, truly one-time legislative event that would grant legalization to a portion of “the children” (some of whom are now 36-years-old) who have already registered for Obama’s DACA program — and that limited group only.

One of the lessons of the 1986 amnesty is that nobody here illegally – of any age and no matter how they got here – should ever again be rewarded with U.S. citizenship. Neither should they ever be allowed to sponsor their parents or other family members for naturalization or admittance into the United States.

The obvious but mostly unpublicized danger of allowing a Congressional DACA amnesty “for the children” is that even now, illegal aliens are flowing over the border with children in tow. Are we to have an amnesty “for the children” every decade or so?

To deter the sure-to-come illegal rush of additional of victims of borders seeking the next “dreamer” amnesty, any consideration of legalization for DACA recipients should be well after legislation has been passed, funding appropriated and significant progress has been made on implementation of badly needed nationwide work-place verification (E-Verify), true border security – including President Trump’s promised border barrier – increased interior immigration enforcement and the biometric system to monitor the departure of temporary visa holder’s departure from the U.S. which is already law, but not practice.

About half of the illegal aliens now present in our nation did not come here illegally. They came on temporary visas and never intended to leave as promised. The Department of Homeland Security reports that last year alone, 629,000 visa holders overstayed their visas as students, workers or tourists.

All weeping and howling that we must grant amnesty and citizenship to “the children” – and that we must never “break up families” — should be met with educated and obvious reality. In addition to the children being brought over our borders illegally right now, last week, next week and next year, parents of the potential 2027 push “for the children” amnesty are flouting the fact their tourist visa to visit Disney World expired while they enroll their now illegal alien anchors in the American school system.

More reality is that many DACA recipients are protesting in American streets demanding an end to any immigration enforcement. Waving signs that read “ICE OUT OF GEORGIA –NOT ONE MORE DEPORTATION!” does little for their amnesty cause among mainstream Americans.

Reality should matter on immigration and amnesty. HERE

Casey Cagle – photo Global Watchdog

UPDATE: Four days later, he filed a complaint.

Georgia gubernatorial candidate Casey Cagle says the City of Decatur is in violation of state sanctuary city law. We think he has received some bad legal advice on this one. But if he is convinced of a violation, he should file a complaint with the  IERB, which has authority on the sanctuary city law. Here is how to file. If there were a violation, we already would have filed.

We hope the Lt. Governor and his opponents in the race focus on improving existing statutes and real violations of state law aimed at protecting Georgians from the perils of illegal immigration. But the  Georgia Chamber of Commerce et al would not approve…

We think we may see a squirrel.

photo Cobb County Schools

September 20, 2017

Mr. King,

I am responding to your email received September 15, 2017 under the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50- 18-70 et. seq. Your original request is also included below.

Of those records that can be produced, the records first must be redacted of confidential information. See, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(b). Redaction may include the following:
· Portions of the documents contain personally identifiably student information pursuant to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act 20 U.S.C. § 1232g. (“FERPA”), as detailed in O.C.G.A. §50-18-72(a)(37).

There is a cost associated with the production of these records. The district charges for the production of records at the hourly salary of the lowest-paid full-time employee who has the necessary skill and training to search for, retrieve, copy, review, and redact the documents, less the first quarter hour. See O.C.G.A. § 50-18-71(c)(1). The labor time for the production of these records is estimated to be 333 hours. Therefore, the total cost to produce these records is estimated to be $11,045.61. Additionally, it will take approximately four to six (4-6) weeks to produce these records. (emphasis mine)

Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 50-18-71(d), the district is providing you a cost estimate to produce these records and will defer retrieval of the records until such time as you pay in full the estimated cost of record production. Please let me know if you wish for the District to proceed. If no response is received within thirty (30) days, the District will consider the request withdrawn and the cost estimate null and void. You may respond by email to openrecords@cobbk12.org.

Thanks,

Kelly Moore
Open Records Clerk
Policy, Planning & Student Support
Cobb County School District
Phone 770-514-3870
Fax 678-594-7778
openrecords@cobbk12.org
cid:image001.png@01D2EAA1.ED3C1E20
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of any information from this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by collect telephone call at (770-514-3870) or electronic mail (e-mail).

Initial responses to open records requests and any applicable exemptions are based upon general knowledge of documentation types and the relationship of the requestor to the record(s). Noted exemptions may or may not be applicable to the records upon production. Additional exemption may also be identified upon the actual review of the records if they were not available at the time of the response. The final list of redactions that apply to any record produced will be identified in the final response in accordance with O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(b). To the extent that the open records request is related to any pending litigation matters involving the school district, please be advised the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-71(e), requires that you send a copy of your request to counsel for the school district: Gregory, Doyle, Calhoun & Rogers at 49 Atlanta Street, Marietta, GA 30066.

______

From: D.A. KING [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 6:38 PM
To: OpenRecords <OpenRecords@ cobbk12.org>
Subject: Re: Open records request

Very sorry. You are correct. My oversight. Please send me copies from dates July 1, 2012 to 15 Sept., 2017.

dak
On Sep 14, 2017, at 5:00 PM, OpenRecords <OpenRecords@cobbk12.org> wrote:

Mr. King,

I am responding to your email submitted under the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50- 18-70 et. seq. Your request is included below.

In reviewing the responsive documents to your request, I realized that you did not specify a timeframe for which you are seeking this documentation. Also, I wanted to make sure that I have interpreted your request correctly.

To confirm your request, I have attached a sample set of documentation in which we believe to be responsive to the request below. Please review and confirm that these are documents you are seeking. Additionally, please confirm for which school years you would like to receive the documents. Once you have confirmed this information, we will be able to provide an accurate time and cost estimate for the full production of documents.

Thanks,

Kelly Moore
Open Records Clerk
Policy, Planning & Student Support
Cobb County School District
Phone 770-514-3870
Fax 678-594-7778
openrecords@cobbk12.org
<image001.png>
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of any information from this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by collect telephone call at (770-514-3870) or electronic mail (e-mail).

Initial responses to open records requests and any applicable exemptions are based upon general knowledge of documentation types and the relationship of the requestor to the record(s). Noted exemptions may or may not be applicable to the records upon production. Additional exemption may also be identified upon the actual review of the records if they were not available at the time of the response. The final list of redactions that apply to any record produced will be identified in the final response in accordance with O.C.G.A. § 50-18-72(b). To the extent that the open records request is related to any pending litigation matters involving the school district, please be advised the Georgia Open Records Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-18-71(e), requires that you send a copy of your request to counsel for the school district: Gregory, Doyle, Calhoun & Rogers at 49 Atlanta Street, Marietta, GA 30060.

From: D.A. KING [mailto:D]
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2017 3:38 PM
To: Kelly Moore <Kelly.Moore @cobbk12.org>; OpenRecords <OpenRecords@cobbk12.org>
Subject: Open records request

On Sep 7, 2017, at 2:43 PM, Kelly Moore <Kelly.Moore@ cobbk12.org> wrote:

Mr. King,

In order to process your open records request, we will need you to submit it directly to openrecords@cobbk12.org as indicated on our website and in accordance with OCGA § 50-18-70 et al.

Thanks,

Kelly Moore
Open Records Clerk
Policy, Planning & Student Support
Cobb County School District
Phone 770-514-3870
Fax 678-594-7778

HERE  

Below sent to Ms. Pamela Wilson
Public Affairs Officer
Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

I received a call from Jane Cowley this morning.
Department of Homeland Security

photo: s3amazonaws.com

Hi, Ms. Wilson, I hope all is well with you.

I am still writing on the DACA/drivers license topic and have a few more questions, please.

As per your response to one of my prior inquiries, USCIS stated that “Current law does not grant any legal status for the class of individuals who are current recipients of DACA. Recipients of DACA are currently unlawfully present in the U.S. with their removal deferred.”

The language of laws in most, if not all states, including Georgia (OCGA 50-36-1), uses the term “lawful presence” as a qualifier for drivers licenses and other public benefits. Applicants with DACA status are verified as eligible by the SAVE system for a Georgia drivers license. I have learned from a Georgia DDS response to a state senator’s question that “the SAVE response code for a non-citizen who has been granted deferred action status is 188 “INITL RESP. 188 DACA – EMLOY AUTH.”

Georgia DDS is issuing drivers licenses to DACA recipients based on this response which doesn’t seem to directly address either the legal status or lawful presence of the applicant for a drivers license.

Questions:

1) On the SAVE website, we see that SAVE “verifies an applicant’s immigration or citizenship status within seconds.” The reply “employment authorized” seems like an E-Verify response to an employment eligibility query, not a SAVE immigration status response. Can you please verify that this is indeed the response an official agency will receive to a query on eligibility for a drivers license involving a DACA recipient?

2) Since DACA does not grant legal status or lawful presence, why/how is a DDS SAVE query on a DACA recipient for a Georgia drivers license apparently providing a positive response to DDS which then uses that response to issue a drivers license?

I realize this is confusing and I hope that I have made my questions clear. Please call me anytime if I can help clarify. Also, if I am confused or wrong please explain my error?

Se

Thank you, if you can provide answers to insure my accuracy.

D.A. King
Marietta, Ga.

__

Reply, recieved November 9, 2017 3:12 PM

1) On the SAVE website, we see that SAVE “verifies an applicant’s immigration or citizenship status within seconds.”  Is this also the case for an agency query on eligibility for a driver’s license involving a DACA recipient?

1. Yes. DHS issues DACA recipients documentation with information that can be used by SAVE registered agencies, including DMVs, to confirm that DHS has granted the individual DACA.

2) Since DACA does not grant legal status or lawful presence, why/how can a Department of Driver Service’s SAVE query on a DACA recipient for a Georgia driver’s license provide (*result in) a positive response, which then can be used to issue a driver’s license?

1. SAVE confirms and provides immigration record information to SAVE registered agencies.  SAVE does not make eligibility determinations for benefits.  Registered agencies use the information provided by SAVE to determine whether the applicant qualifies for the benefit based on the agency’s eligibility criteria found in their laws, regulations and policies.

Pamela Wilson
Spokesperson
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

The Cost of Illegal Immigration to the United States 
HERE

photo: s3amazonaws.com

Feds: Every legal Mexican immigrant sponsors six more to US
HERE

DACA Recipients Should Make Restitution to Their American Identity Theft Victims

HERE