Irrespective of one's views on immigration, legal or otherwise, I think anyone who values and respects the Constitution of the United States can only be outraged at President Obama's latest decision to grant temporary work permits to a certain class of illegal immigrants, rather than deport them as the law requires. As Victor Davis Hanson points out:
Legally, President Obama has reiterated the principle that he can pick and choose which U.S. laws he wishes to enforce (see his decision to reverse the order of the Chrysler creditors, his decision not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, and his administration’s contempt for national-security confidentiality and Senate and House subpoenas to the attorney general). If one individual can decide to exempt nearly a million residents from the law — when he most certainly could not get the law amended or repealed through proper legislative or judicial action — then what can he not do? Obama is turning out to be the most subversive chief executive in terms of eroding U.S. law since Richard Nixon.
There's more at the link.
Article 2, Section 3 of the US Constitution requires the President, among other obligations, to 'take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed'. His oath of office requires that he swear to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States'. On the basis of the law as it stands, I therefore see no difficulty in proving, unambiguously and objectively, that President Obama has violated his oath of office and his responsibilities under the Constitution. Why has no-one yet begun impeachment proceedings against him?