In expressing support for the GOP-led Securing America’s Future (SAF) Act, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) described himself as “guardedly optimistic” that left-wing judges — in the event of the SAF Act’s passage into law — will not usher in a “massive amnesty” by expanding the proposed bill’s parameters for amnestying illegal alien recipients of the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
“I think it is simply the best bill that has yet been introduced in Congress to address our illegal immigration problem,” said Smith, offering his analysis during a Thursday interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight with Breitbart News’s Senior Editors-at-Large Rebecca Mansour and Joel Pollak.
Smith grounded his “guardedly optimistic” posture by pointing to President Donald Trump’s judicial appointments when asked by Mansour about the threat of expanding amnesty parameters via left-wing judicial decisions. Partial transcript:
MANSOUR: How do we ensure that the courts won’t water down (the SAF Act) as they have all past amnesties which have been litigated, and the courts always interpret in the loosest way possible and just make the amnesty endless?
SMITH: There are two things that make me somewhat guardedly optimistic. One is that the president has, of course, appointed more federal judges. We also have a Supreme Court — although it’s closely divided, oftentimes along the lines of many 5-4 votes — that has already held in this administration’s favor on several immigration issues. And we’ve also had some federal courts hold in favor of this administration.
So, I think it’s a different game. Again, largely because of the Supreme Court, and largely because we have a president that believes in enforcing immigration laws. So I think we have a better atmosphere and better environment today to make sure that a bill like this becomes law.
The SAF Act, said Smith, will end chain migration, implement a national mandate for E-Verify use by employers, and increase border security.
Asked by Mansour why any form of amnesty should be accepted prior to implementation of border security and interior enforcement, Smith described the totality of the SAF Act’s proposed changes as concurrent and complementary. Partial transcript:
MANSOUR: One of the things that’s troubling to a lot of people about this bill is, for years, we have been arguing that we need a wall first, or we need security first before we consider any sort of amnesty. Yet this bill, once again, puts the cart before the horse. This is very concerning for people. Why do you feel you have to accept this bill, right now?
SMITH: I’m not sure I agree that it puts the cart before the horse. It has immigration reform provisions in there, it has border security provisions, it has illegal immigration reform, it has E-Verify, it has a lot of good provisions that will go into effect immediately … Enforcement occurs at the same time as the guest worker program. I think it’s the best enforcement bill that’s been introduced. Maybe there are some provisions we might not like as much as others, but when you have a bill that has 90 percent of what you like, and 90 percent directed towards reducing illegal immigration and changing the mix on legal immigration, I think that’s why we can support it.
MANSOUR: In the past we’ve had the same assurance given to us that the border security would come right away. How do we know this time it’s actually true?
SMITH: What you’re referring to is the 1986 immigration bill. It had amnesty in it as well as border security. The amnesty got implemented, the border security was never enforced; but in this case, I think it is different in the sense that the border security provisions start immediately. The structure along the border starts immediately. The legal immigration reform goes into effect immediately. So, when things happen concurrently, I think that’s better than we had in 1986. We also have the important distinction of having a president and an administration who strongly supports border enforcement and security, strongly supports the illegal and legal immigration reforms in the bill. So that is what is the difference between now and 1986.
Smith described himself as “guardedly optimistic” when asked by Mansour about the threat of expanding amnesty parameters via left-wing judicial decisions. Partial transcript:
MANSOUR: How do we ensure that the courts won’t water down (the SAF Act) as they have all past amnesties which have been litigated, and the courts always interpret in the loosest way possible and just make the amnesty endless?
SMITH: There are two things that make me somewhat guardedly optimistic. One is that the president has, of course, appointed more federal judges. We also have a Supreme Court — although it’s closely divided, oftentimes along the lines of many 5-4 votes — that has already held in this administration’s favor on several immigration issues. And we’ve also had some federal courts hold in favor of this administration.
So, I think it’s a different game. Again, largely because of the Supreme Court, and largely because we have a president that believes in enforcing immigration laws. So I think we have a better atmosphere and better environment today to make sure that a bill like this becomes law.
Asked how the SAF Act’s creation of a new agricultural guest worker program annually authorizing temporary work for 500,000 foreigner laborers serves the national interest, Smith told Mansour some agricultural businesses cannot domestically procure their labor needs. Partial transcript:
MANSOUR: How do Americans benefits from importing 500,000 new foreign agricultural workers since this bill creates a whole new agricultural visa program?
SMITH: What we have in that [agricultural] program, and in a lot of these immigration programs, is protections for [American] workers, which is to say employers have to advertise for American workers, they have to employ American workers, they can’t fire American workers and replace them with foreign workers. So there are protections for American workers in there.
I think a valid point is that about half of the people working in agriculture are, in fact, in the country legally. It’s not like it’s 90 percent are illegal we have to legalize all those individuals. So there are Americans who will work [agricultural] jobs. We just sometimes, I think we have to pay more to attract more legal workers, but in the case of some [agricultural] industries, they really do need more workers than they’re able to obtain and that’s why we have the guest worker program in there.
E-Verify “is the single most popular immigration reform provision,” said Smith, describing the SAF Act’s mandate for its use as “protect[ing] jobs for American workers; unemployed American workers; underemployed American workers.” Mansour concurred, describing E-Verify “protecting American workers from unfair and illegal competition that drives down their wages” while “preventing the pull of illegal immigration.”
Breitbart News Tonight airs Monday through Friday on SiriusXM’s Patriot channel 125 from 9:00 p.m. to midnight Eastern (6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Pacific).
LISTEN:
Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter @rkraychik.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.