The flip-flopping liberals are at it again.

This time, the narrative is that the president has no right to impose federal jurisdiction over state laws. With Congress unable to negotiate a way to fund Trump's centerpiece policy of a border wall, the president has made it clear that he may declare a national emergency to fund the wall.

Once upon a time—back in 2012, to be exact—Arizona Governor Jan Brewer had enacted state laws that called for actually enforcing the federal laws that President Obama was clearly ignoring through executive orders. He even went so far as to create a legal status for younger illegal immigrants with an executive order enacting what we now call Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.

A federal judge reversed the state's law, calling it unconstitutional.

This week, we see 16 states are suing to stop the White House's power to use the declaration of emergency to fund Trump's coveted border wall.

Should it go to the Supreme Court, many legal experts believe the Court will defer to the Executive Branch's decision of what dictates a national emergency.

In other words, Trump would probably get his border wall. The problem is, not many want him to create the border wall with this particular action. Vulnerable Republicans facing re-election don't like it, Democrats don't like it, moderate and border state Republicans don't like it.

I am not particularly comfortable with the use of a national emergency declaration here. I just wish Congress did what was best for this nation and not their own party with regards to immigration. I don't believe the wall will bring a stop to human trafficking, illegal migration or drugs coming here. I think the strategy to accomplish those things will need to adjust, but they will if a mere wall is put up.

The solution has to be to make it harder to get here, but impossible to stay here once past obstacles such as a wall.

No longer are liberal pundits able to say "both sides are guilty" of illegal immigration. While I readily agree that this was the case up until the fall of 2007, clearly there are two schools of thought in the nation:

  • Republicans understand their base adamantly wants border security and domestic compliance of our immigration laws by foreigners, and they are demanding vigilant enforcement of these laws. They want federal involvement and local governments to cooperate.
  • Democrats are doing everything in their power to grant asylum, refuge, access to the United States to more and more illegal immigrants, believing this will further empower their party for the future.

DACA is basically an older kids "anchor baby" policy. Even President Obama didn't see it as sound policy forever, calling it "a temporary fix." This policy creates a path to citizenship for older children based on an unrealistic caveat that they cannot be held to, which is to promise to either serve in the military or go to college here.

Trump saw DACA as millions of Americans who voted for him do: as an excuse to legitimize illegal immigrants and usurp the laws and criteria for U.S. citizenship. Trump tried to shut down DACA but federal courts have stopped him so far.

The White House is urging the Supreme Court to hear the case as soon as possible but it doesn't look good so far. It appears they won't consider it until at least October of this year.

President Obama ordered reinstatement of "catch and release," a maligned Bush policy that was enacted when housing facilities were overwhelmed.

It saw ICE and Border Patrol catch illegal immigrants, collect what pertinent information they could provide to the authorities, and then release them into the nation. Each had been given the summons to appear in federal immigration court for a hearing upon their release.

Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council said, "Immigration laws today to be mere suggestions."

Some 90 percent never appeared in the court of their own free will. Critics accused  President Obama of knowingly creating a flow of illegal immigration right through our legal ports of entry.

Since Trump took over the White House in January of 2017, Democrats all over the country have declared areas in which they are either governors or mayors as a sanctuary for illegal immigrants. They have taken proactive measures to counter-act any executive or federal laws which would incarcerate for court hearings or deport illegal immigrants.

These liberal elected are outwardly ordering their police departments and law-enforcement agencies to not cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

So to be clear, when federal action results in a willingness to ignore immigration laws which keep the flow of illegal immigration going, the Democrats can be found to support federal law.

When federal laws call for enforcement of immigration laws or measurable security action at the border such as Trump's wall or even incarcerating immigrants until they can be brought to immigration hearings, the Democrats call for civil disobedience and predictably accuse those in support of being racists.

Ken Pittman is the host of The Ken Pittman Show on 1420 WBSM New Bedford. He can be heard Saturdays from 9 a.m. to noon. Contact him at ken.pittman@townsquaremedia.com and follow him on Twitter @RadioKenPittman. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.