Of America’s four national newspapers, only the New York Times’ editorial board is satisfied with President Obama’s plan to act on immigration reform without Congress.
Obama on Thursday announced that he would issue an executive order to delay deportation for some 5 million immigrants now living in the United States illegally.
“The president always has had authority to calibrate and prioritize the enforcement of immigration (and other) laws, but this wholesale reinterpretation amounts to overreaching,” the Washington Post editorial board said in response. “Mr. Obama was right to argue Thursday that otherwise law-abiding undocumented immigrants deserve a route out of the shadows. But unilateral action is not the right way to achieve that.”
Obama’s announcement did no better with USA Today. “His plan — which will allow certain immigrants to avoid deportation for three years — amounts to executive overreach,” said the newspaper’s editorial board.
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board sounded a similar note: “Obama’s policy by executive order is tearing at the fabric of national consent.”
Obama acknowledged in his address that his actions are only temporary and he called on Congress to do more. “[T]o those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer,” he said. “Pass a bill.”
The president did find a friend in the Times, however. The paper wrote before Obama’s address that his executive order “should be cause for relief and celebration.”
The Times editors added that “this initiative cannot be allowed to fail for lack of support from those who accept the need for progress on immigration, however incremental.
“Courageous immigrant advocates, led by day laborers, Dreamers and others, have pressed a reluctant president to acknowledge the urgency of their cause — and to do something about it. The only proper motion now is forward.”
