RSS

The Daily Oklahoman (Oklahoma City, OK)

30 Mar

A court ruling this week provides Congress considerably more time to try to approve an alternative to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. Will it make a difference? Those in the program, called “Dreamers,” are left to hope so, although inaction in Washington as a pending deadline approached leaves plenty of reason for concern. President Trump announced in September that he was canceling DACA, instituted by former President Barack Obama in 2012, and that he wanted Congress to fix it.

The program protects from deportation roughly 700,000 immigrants brought to this country illegally as children. Dreamers are allowed to work, attend school and qualify for a driver’s license if they stay out of trouble. Trump gave Congress a March 5 deadline to come up with a new plan. Since then, DACA has gotten woven into budget talks that led to a three-day government shutdown, and more recently, four immigration bills were rejected on the same day in the U.S. Senate. Those proposals were offered as the deadline neared. This week, the Supreme Court refused to hear the Trump administration’s appeal of two California courts’ rulings blocking the administration’s plan to end DACA. The administration wanted to bypass lower courts and go directly to the Supreme Court. The high court’s refusal means DACA will survive for several more months, and perhaps much longer, as several lawsuits related to the program make their way through appeals courts before winding up before the Supreme Court. This provides relief to Dreamers, who were understandably anxious about the prospect of losing their work permits, having to leave school, or perhaps being deported to their countries of origin. The administration is on sound footing in challenging DACA’s legality – Obama instituted the program unilaterally not long after saying he didn’t have the authority to issue work permits. But this isn’t something the high court should have to decide. Instead, Congress needs to fix it, because Congress is responsible for immigration law. But politics keeps getting in the way. Democrats have mostly insisted on legislation focused on protecting Dreamers. Republicans want that, too, and have even supported a path to citizenship for DACA recipients, but also demand stricter immigration enforcement and considerably more border security. On Monday – March 5 – the group United We Dream, made up of undocumented immigrants, plans to protest in Washington to prod Congress. “We’ve waited for too long on institutions of power to decide our fate,” the coalition’s director of policy and advocacy told USA Today. “Congress has yet to do its job. “It now has more time to do so on this important topic. Our hope, perhaps misplaced, is that lawmakers will continue working toward a DACA solution that provides certainty and peace of mind for Dreamers, instead of simply walking away until the next deadline looms.

 

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
PUBLICATION-TYPE: Newspaper

Introduction:  Have a hook to get reader’s interest.  State the name of the newspaper, the title of editorial, and the date on which the editorial was originally published.

Body Paragraph 1: Summarize the editorial’s main points

Body Paragraph 2: Explain the strengths of how the writer presented his/her position on the editorial’s topic.  What information or opinions were presented convincingly and why were they convincing?

Body Paragraph 3:  Explain the weaknesses of how the writer presented his/her position on the editorial’s topic.  What information or opinions were weakly presented or not convincing and why were they not convincing?

Body Paragraph 4:  Explain what changes you would have made to the editorial to make it more effective in its persuasive purpose.  What you would have done differently than the writer and why?

Conclusion: Summarize the strengths, weaknesses, and changes from the body paragraphs.  End with a concluding technique that makes the end of the paper feel complete for a reader.

Below is the editorial that I need to critique for this assignment.

The Daily Oklahoman (Oklahoma City, OK)

March 2, 2018 Friday

Will more time lead to a DACA remedy?
BYLINE: The Oklahoman Opinion
SECTION: OPINION
LENGTH: 484 words
A court ruling this week provides Congress considerably more time to try to approve an alternative to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. Will it make a difference? Those in the program, called “Dreamers,” are left to hope so, although inaction in Washington as a pending deadline approached leaves plenty of reason for concern. President Trump announced in September that he was canceling DACA, instituted by former President Barack Obama in 2012, and that he wanted Congress to fix it.

The program protects from deportation roughly 700,000 immigrants brought to this country illegally as children. Dreamers are allowed to work, attend school and qualify for a driver’s license if they stay out of trouble. Trump gave Congress a March 5 deadline to come up with a new plan. Since then, DACA has gotten woven into budget talks that led to a three-day government shutdown, and more recently, four immigration bills were rejected on the same day in the U.S. Senate. Those proposals were offered as the deadline neared. This week, the Supreme Court refused to hear the Trump administration’s appeal of two California courts’ rulings blocking the administration’s plan to end DACA. The administration wanted to bypass lower courts and go directly to the Supreme Court. The high court’s refusal means DACA will survive for several more months, and perhaps much longer, as several lawsuits related to the program make their way through appeals courts before winding up before the Supreme Court. This provides relief to Dreamers, who were understandably anxious about the prospect of losing their work permits, having to leave school, or perhaps being deported to their countries of origin. The administration is on sound footing in challenging DACA’s legality – Obama instituted the program unilaterally not long after saying he didn’t have the authority to issue work permits. But this isn’t something the high court should have to decide. Instead, Congress needs to fix it, because Congress is responsible for immigration law. But politics keeps getting in the way. Democrats have mostly insisted on legislation focused on protecting Dreamers. Republicans want that, too, and have even supported a path to citizenship for DACA recipients, but also demand stricter immigration enforcement and considerably more border security. On Monday – March 5 – the group United We Dream, made up of undocumented immigrants, plans to protest in Washington to prod Congress. “We’ve waited for too long on institutions of power to decide our fate,” the coalition’s director of policy and advocacy told USA Today. “Congress has yet to do its job. “It now has more time to do so on this important topic. Our hope, perhaps misplaced, is that lawmakers will continue working toward a DACA solution that provides certainty and peace of mind for Dreamers, instead of simply walking away until the next deadline looms.

 

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
PUBLICATION-TYPE: Newspaper

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 30, 2018 in academic writing, Academic Writing

 

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: