Law Professor: Obama Will ‘Petulantly’ Defy Voters with ‘Illegal’ Executive Amnesty

Jan Ting, one of the country’s preeminent immigration experts and Temple law professor, believes Obama knows his forthcoming executive amnesty is “illegal” and “unconstitutional,” but will petulantly go forward with it, despite the anti-amnesty message that the midterm electorate sent him.

Writing in The Philadelphia Inquirer, Ting noted that Americans “spoke through the ballot box on Nov. 4, defeating many of Obama’s Democratic allies who had voted for his failed immigration amnesty bill.” This includes “Sens. Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Mark Udall of Colorado, and Mark Begich of Alaska, with Mary Landrieu of Louisiana apparently headed for defeat in a runoff.” 

Since “voters also replaced Democratic senators who voted for Obama’s amnesty bill with new Republicans in Iowa, Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia,” in addition to expanding the “GOP majority in the U.S. House by 12 seats,” Ting believes “an executive immigration amnesty would be a petulant and unconstitutional response to the election, one that simply ignores the will of the American people.”

A Polling Company exit poll of the midterm electorate indeed found that 74% of voters did not want Obama to enact executive amnesty, and another 80% did not want foreigners taking jobs from Americans and legal immigrants already in the country.

Ting cited Obama’s past comments to Univision, La Raza, the Hispanic Roundtable, and pro-amnesty DREAMers, in which he reiterated that he did not have the power to suspend deportations and act like an “emperor” or a “king” via executive action to demonstrate that Obama, the former constitutional law lecturer, knows his imminent executive amnesty is unlawful. 

Also, a liberal law professor, George Washington’s Jonathan Turley, said last week that Obama’s forthcoming executive amnesty would be an “unprecedented” and “dangerous” threat to the constitutional system.