Including but not limited to all Articles and Sections of our Constitution/By Laws, etc... applicable in governing the United States of America!

United States Amnesty, Immigration & Constitution (Including but not limited to) The rule of law, presidential power, and the structural limits of the U.S. Constitution violations:

Violations to the Take Care Clause, U.S. CONST. art. 2, sec. 3, cl. 5, Faithful Execution Clause (The President shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed)

(A) - Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

Administrative Procedure Act, 5, section 551 (Including but not limited) TITLE 5, PART I, CHAPTER 5, SUBCHAPTER II.

(B) - Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?

path=/prelim@title5/part1/chapter5/subchapter2&edition=prelim

1. On November 20, 2014, the President of the United States announced that he would unilaterally suspend the immigration laws as applied to 4 million of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States.

2. The President candidly admitted that, in so doing, he unilaterally rewrote the law: “What you’re not paying attention to is, I just took an action to change the law.”

3. In accordance with the President’s unilateral exercise of lawmaking, his Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) issued a directive that purports to legalize the presence of approximately 40% of the known undocumented-immigrant population, and affords them legal rights and benefits.

(C) - Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=50777

Jeh Charles Johnson, Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children and with Respect to Certain Individuals Whose Parents are U.S. Citizens or Permanent Residents (Nov. 20, 2014)

4. That unilateral suspension of the Nation’s immigration laws is not only unlawful but dramatic and will result in irreparable injuries.

5. On March 26, 2009, Senator Richard Durbin and Representative Howard Berman introduced the DREAM Act in the U.S. Senate and House, respectively.

(D) Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/Dream_Act_071

310_0.pdf DREAM Act of 2009, S. 729 (111th Cong.) (2009); American Dream Act, H.R. 1751 (111th Cong.) (2009).

Both bills would have allowed 6 undocumented immigrants to apply for conditional permanent resident status if,among other things, (a) they entered the United States before their 16th birthdays, and (b) they had been in the United States continuously for five years.

6. The President repeatedly and forcefully urged Congress to pass the DREAM Act.

7. The President consistently insisted that he could not achieve the goals of the DREAM Act on his own. He said, for instance:

• “Comprehensive reform, that’s how we’re going to solve this problem.

Anybody who tells you that I can wave a magic wand and make it happen hasn’t been paying attention to how this town works.” (May 5, 2010)

• “I am president, I am not king. I can’t do these things just by myself. There’s a limit to the discretion that I can show because I am obliged to execute the law. I can’t just make the laws up by myself.” (Oct. 25, 2010)

• In response to a question about whether he could stop deportation of undocumented students with an executive order: “Well, first of all, temporary protective status historically has been used for special circumstances where you have immigrants to this country who are fleeing persecution in their countries, or there is some emergency situation in their native land that required them to come to the United States. So it would not be appropriate to use that just for a particular group that came here primarily for economic opportunity. With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed. There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.” (Mar. 28,2011) (emphasis added)

• “I can’t solve this problem by myself. We’re going to have to change the laws in Congress.” (Apr. 20, 2011)

• “I know some here wish that I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself. But that’s not how democracy works. See, democracy is hard. But it’s right. Changing our laws means doing the hard work of changing minds and changing votes, one by one.” (Apr. 29, 2011)

• “And sometimes when I talk to immigration advocates, they wish I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself. But that’s not how a democracy works.” (May 10, 2011)

• “Believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting, but that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our Constitution is written.” (July 25, 2011)

• “Administratively, we can’t ignore the law. We are doing everything we can administratively. But the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce.” (Sept. 28, 2011)

8. Neither congressional chamber passed the DREAM Act.

9. The President then asked the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (“OLC”) whether he could effectuate the goals of the un-enacted DREAM Act by executive fiat. OLC said “yes,” with certain conditions. In particular, OLC advised the President that he could use the concept of “deferred action for childhood arrivals,” or “DACA,” to stop deporting individuals who (a) entered the United States before their 16th birthdays, and (b) had been in the United States continuously for five years.

Memorandum for Secretary of Homeland Security, from Karl R. Thompson, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, The Department of Homeland Security’s Authority to Prioritize Removal of Certain Aliens Unlawfully Present in the United States and to Defer Removal of Others. (11-19-14)

(E) Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/attachments/201

4/11/20/2014-11-19-auth-prioritize-removal.pdf

The OLC orally advised the President “before DACA was announced” in

2012). OLC further advised, however, that “it was critical that, like past policies that made deferred action available to certain classes of aliens, the DACA program require immigration officials to evaluate each application for deferred action on a case-by-case basis, rather than granting deferred action automatically to all applicants who satisfied the threshold eligibility criteria.

10. Notwithstanding his repeated insistence that he could not stretch his executive powers any further, the President announced his unilateral creation of the DACA program on June 15, 2012.

11. At the President’s direction, the DHS Secretary then suspended the Nation’s immigration laws for approximately 1.7 million undocumented immigrants. Memorandum from Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children (June 15, 2012)

(F) Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/s1-exercising-prosecutorial-discretion-individuals-who-came-to-us-as-children.pdf

12. The President and his DHS Secretary ordered federal immigration officials to extend “deferred action” to undocumented immigrants who entered the United States before their 16th birthdays, and had been in the United States continuously for five years.

13. Although OLC had cautioned the President that it was “critical” to

DACA’s legality that the Administration evaluate every application on a case-by case basis, the President and DHS ignored that advice.

According to the latest figures available, the Administration granted deferred action to 99.5-99.8% of DACA applicants.

14. The Executive Branch did not stop at dispensing with the Nation’s

immigration laws. Rather UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, BROWNSVILLE DIVISION, has found, the Administration adopted a policy that encouraged international child smuggling across the Texas/Mexico border. See Order, United States v. Nava-Martinez, No. 1:13-cr-00441, at 2 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 13, 2013) (“Nava-Martinez Order”).

(G) Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

http://irli.org/system/files/US%20v%20Nava-Martinez%20%28DHS%20assists

%20smugglers%29.pdf

Whereas U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen stated, "The "dangerous" practice is effectively aiding human traffickers and particularly the drug cartels, which run many of these operations. "These actions are both dangerous and unconscionable." He detailed the case of an illegal immigrant parent in Virginia, but used that as an entry point to describe what he suggested was a broader program.

Hanen claimed that, in more than one case before his court, immigration

officials are arresting human traffickers smuggling children into the U.S. and then "delivering the minors to the custody of the parent illegally living in the United States."

"The DHS has simply chosen not to enforce the United States' border security laws," "Time and again this court has been told by representatives of the government and the defense that cartels control the entire smuggling process," Hanen wrote. "... the government is not only allowing [illegal immigrants in the U.S.] to fund the illegal and evil activities of these cartels, but is also inspiring them to do so." He added: "To put this in another context, the DHS policy is as logical as taking illegal drugs or weapons that it has seized from smugglers and delivering them to the criminals who initially solicited their illegal importation/exportation. Legally, this situation is no different."

15. The defendant in Nava-Martinez, an admitted human trafficker, was caught attempting to smuggle a ten-year-old El Salvadorean girl into the United States.

16. The Court noted that this was “the fourth case with the same factual situation this Court has had in as many weeks.” Id. at 3. Although the human traffickers were apprehended in each case, “the DHS completed the criminal conspiracy by delivering the minors to the custody of the parent.”

17. This was done pursuant to DHS’s “apparent policy of completing the criminal mission of individuals who are violating the border security of the United States.” As the Court observed, “this DHS policy is a dangerous course of action.” Under the policy, “instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, the Government takes direct steps to help the individuals who violated it.”

18. This Court found that DHS’s policy promotes human trafficking, which in turn “helps fund the illegal drug cartels which are a very real danger for both citizens of this country and Mexico.” The Court explained that citizens of the United States bear the economic brunt of this policy, because DHS “funds these evil ventures with their tax dollars.” Id. at 8. In addition, the policy harms the citizens of each country that suffers from the “nefarious activities of the cartels.”

The President “Change[s] the Law”

19. Between his 2012 DACA announcement and the midterm elections in November 2014, the President repeatedly acknowledged that his non-enforcement efforts already had reached the outer limit of his administrative powers, and that any further transformation of the immigration system would have to be accomplished by legislation. He said, for instance:

• “As the head of the executive branch, there’s a limit to what I can do. . . .Until we have a law in place that provides a pathway for legalization and/or citizenship for the folks in question, we’re going to continue to be bound by the law.” (Sept. 20, 2012)

• “We are a nation of immigrants, but we’re also a nation of laws. So what I’ve said is, we need to fix a broken immigration system. And I’ve done everything that I can on my own.” (Oct. 16, 2012)

• In response to a question about the possibility of a moratorium on deportations for non-criminals: “I’m not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I’m required to follow the law.” (Jan. 30, 2013)

• In response to the question whether he could do for “an undocumented

mother of three” what he did for DACA recipients: “I’m not a king. We can’t simply ignore the law. When it comes to the dreamers we were able to identify that group, but to sort through all the possible cases of everybody who might have a sympathetic story to tell is very difficult to do. This is why we need comprehensive immigration reform.

If this was an issue that I could do unilaterally I would have done it a long time ago. The way our system works is Congress has to pass legislation, then get an opportunity to sign and implement it.” (Jan. 30, 2013)

• “This is something I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that you know I’m the president of the United States, I’m not the emperor of the United States and what that means is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place. We kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can.” (Feb. 14, 2013)

• “I think that it’s very important for us to recognize that the way to solve this problem has to be legislative and we’ve been able to provide help through deferred action for young people and students, but this is a problem that needs to be fixed legislatively.” (July 16, 2013).

• “My job in the executive branch is supposed to be to carry out the laws that are passed. Congress has said ‘here is the law’ when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they’ve allocated a whole bunch of money for enforcement. What we can do is then carve out the DREAM Act, saying young people who have basically grown up here are Americans that we should welcome, but if we start broadening that, then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally. So, that’s not an option.” (Sept. 17, 2013) (emphasis added)

• “If in fact I could solve all these problems without passing laws in

Congress, then I would do so. But we’re also a nation of laws. That’s part of our tradition. And so the easy way out is to try to yell and pretend like I can do something by violating our laws. And what I’m proposing is the harder path, which is to use our democratic processes to achieve the same goal.” (Nov. 25, 2013)

• "What I’ve said in the past remains true, which is until Congress passes a new law, then I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do. What I’ve done is to use my prosecutorial discretion. . . . What we’ve said is focus on folks who are engaged in criminal activity, focus on people who engaged in gang activity. Do not focus on young people, who we’re calling DREAMers. . . . That already stretched my administrative capacity very far. But I was confident that that was the right thing to do. But at a certain point the reason that these deportations are taking place is, Congress said, ‘you have to enforce these laws.’ They fund the hiring of officials at the department that’s

charged with enforcing. And I cannot ignore those laws any more than I could ignore, you know, any of the other laws that are on the books.” (Mar. 6, 2014) (emphasis added)

20. Accordingly, the President repeatedly called on Congress to pass an

immigration reform bill. On June 27, 2013, the Senate passed a bill that, among other things, would have created a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

(H) Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/744

Border Security, Economic Opportunity, & Immigration Modernization Act, S. 744 (113th Cong.) (2013). The House, on the other hand, did not pass similar legislation.

21. Before the midterm elections in November 2014, Democrats in the

Senate urged the President not to act unilaterally because it “could be so politically damaging in their states that it would destroy their chances to hold control of the Senate.” Michael D. Shear & Julia Preston, Obama Pushed ‘Fullest Extent’ of His Powers on Immigration Plan, N.Y. TIMES (Nov. 28, 2014). The President honored that request.

(I) Ex...Memo/Link/Law etc:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/29/us/white-house-tested-limits-of-powers-before-action-on-immigration.html?_r=0

22. On November 20, 2014, the President announced that he would unilaterally create legal protections for approximately 4 million undocumented immigrants. Under the President’s plan, the undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents would receive deferred action status, as well as work permits and tolling of their unlawful presence in the United States. The President 19 also expanded DACA to hundreds of thousands of additional undocumented immigrants.

23. The President candidly admitted that his plan was unilateral legislation: “What you’re not paying attention to is, I just took an action to change the law.”

24. The President further admitted that he was changing the law because Congress chose not to: “When members of Congress question my authority to make our immigration system work better, I have a simple answer:

Pass a bill. . . .and the day I sign that bill into law, the actions I take will no longer be necessary.”

25. The President also made clear that he was “offering the following deal”: “If you’ve taken responsibility, you’ve registered, undergone a background check, you’re paying taxes, you’ve been here for five years, you’ve got roots in the community, you’re not going to be deported. If you meet the criteria, you can come out of the shadows, you can get right with the law.”

We the American People, citizens of The United States request the following:

(Including but not limited to); Immediate implementation of our Constitution/By Laws.

For Immigration Reform to be implemented in a "Non-destructive" manner to our country (ex...Ensuring Veterans/American citizens have homes, health care, etc. before any immigrants be allowed into our country).

Any/all employment be for overabundance of umemployed "American" people and any person/persons violating this right be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

We request "All" leaders of our Government/States, "All" state officials,

"ALL" lawmakers act on our behalf and in our (American Citizens) best interest, to construct the necessary paperwork and documentation and partipate in a lawsuit filed on or about 11/26/14, in the state of Texas, regarding above mentioned actions.

We respectfully request/demand to join and be included with the following states/leaders (Including but not limited to):

TEXAS, ALABAMA, GEORGIA, IDAHO, INDIANA, KANSAS, LOUISIANA, MONTANA, NEBRASKA, SOUTH CAROLINA, SOUTH DAKOTA, UTAH, WEST VIRGINIA, WISCONSIN, GOVERNOR PHIL BRYANT; State of Mississippi, GOVERNOR PAUL R. LEPAGE; State of Maine, GOVERNOR PATRICK L. MCCRORY; State of North Carolina,

GOVERNOR C.L. “BUTCH” OTTER; State of Idaho.

For no reason shall this petition be deemed null and void until all extents of the law and our rights as "American Citizens" have been exercised and or exhausted.

We the under signed have fully read and viewed the contents of this petition. It is agreed upon and here by signed with the intent that "ALL" signatures are and shall be considered authentic and legally binding.