ULP

Solvency
 A2 – Shutdown Delays
Shutdown can’t affect USCIS – Immigration funding isn’t dependent on Congress
Boundless 12/21 (Boundless – Immigrantion advisory business aiding in visa applications and legal tutorials. <MKIM> “The Latest
Government Shutdown Won’t Disrupt the Immigration System”. 12/21/18. DOA: 1/14/19. https://www.boundless.com/blog/latest-
government-shutdown-wont-disrupt-immigration-system/?fbclid=IwAR13g-unpsDswXPl9gSiiTvZIRUvhb9tQOUpnEA_6OCZyYUwU8B-dwXFKdg)

Why Immigration Won’t Shut Down While a partial government shutdown is bound to cause serious disruption
across the nine federal departments and many other agencies affected, the immigration system carries on more or less
as usual. That’s because most immigration-related agencies are funded directly by user fees, and don’t depend
on Congress (or taxpayers) for their budget. Let’s look at how each relevant agency will avoid problems this time… USCIS U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) made clear in its official statement that the shutdown “does not
affect USCIS’s fee-funded activities. Our offices will remain open, and all individuals should attend
interviews and appointments as scheduled.” Common forms will continue to be processed by USCIS
officials (who won’t be furloughed or work unpaid like government employees in other parts of the Department of
Homeland Security). For example, if you have already filed one of the following forms, or if you plan on filing soon, you shouldn’t expect any
extra delays on account of the shutdown (unless you need a document from an agency that is affected — see below): Work permit application
(Form I-765) Travel permit application (Form I-131) Family sponsorship form (Form I-130) Green card application (Form I-485) This is only a
small sample of USCIS forms, of course, and it’s worth noting that some delays appear to be on the rise for long-term reasons that have nothing
to do with the shutdown.
Parole
 PDCP
Doesn’t compete – Executive deferrals on unlawfully present immigrants are
functionally identical to LPR
Margulies 15 (Peter Margulies – Author and Professor of Immigration Law at Roger Williams University. <MKIM> “The Boundaries of
Executive Discretion: Deferred Action, Unlawful Presence, and Immigration Law”. 2/3/15. DOA: 1/13/19.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2559836)

Moreover, DAPA defenders’ facile distinction between status and benefit ignores the behavioral truth that Congress has recognized since IRCA:
unlawful migration is driven not by the allure of status, per se, but by the pull of benefits attached to status,
including the ability to work legally. If we view immigration status as a bundle of benefits, as well as a formal
legal category, it is easy to see that DAPA gives its recipients much of what led them to the United States. As the
House Judiciary Committee said in its report on IIRIRA, jobs are the “magnet” for unlawful migration.290 DAPA
vindicates the attraction that U.S. employment exerted for DAPA’s recipients. DAPA also provides its
recipients with the chance to remain in the U.S. for three years, and the prospect for renewing relief after
that date, as DACA has done. 291 Viewed as an intermediate-term bundle of benefits, DAPA is surely the
functional equivalent of LPR status. In the long term, DAPA lacks the certainty and path to citizenship that LPR status confers.
However, as the great economist John Maynard Keynes once wryly observed, “In the long run, we are all dead.”292 Intermediate
effects often drive human action, and in the intermediate term DAPA confers many of the benefits of
LPR status.
CIR
Aff
 Won’t Pass
CIR has reached political limbo – Laundry list of obstacles make compromise
impossible
Bernal 1/12 (Rafael Bernal – Political journalist for The Hill. <MKIM> “Dreamers-for-wall trade going nowhere in House”. 1/12/19. DOA:
1/13/19. https://thehill.com/latino/425003-dreamers-for-border-wall-deal-going-nowhere-in-
house?fbclid=IwAR33PiB3HYRA9YrdTpiYEClQE0jk-yjU4GkggC-il9aNewd3KcJEMZ_VmyM)

A deal to reopen the government by trading border wall funding for immigration benefits for so-called Dreamers
doesn’t stand a chance in the House, according to legislators on both sides of the aisle. House Democrats say
they don't trust President Trump to keep his end of any bargain, and are wary of negotiating a deal that
could benefit those in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program while throwing other undocumented
immigrants under the bus. "Many of us, Democrats and Republicans, want to find a solution to this, and the White House has never
been supportive of that," said Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), a moderate who worked out a Dreamers-for-wall deal with Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas)
last summer. That bill would have granted a path to citizenship to Dreamers both within and outside DACA in exchange for technological and
manpower investments in border security, but no wall construction. The Hurd-Aguilar bill, which lacked the support of GOP leadership, never
made it to the floor. Aguilar ruled out even preliminary cross-aisle negotiations while the partial government
shutdown is in effect. "If Republicans want to have conversations, we're always happy to, and you know that I will continue to have
conversations with Republicans about a long-term solution to this. But we can't negotiate while the government is shut
down, period," he said. Meanwhile, the GOP refuses to join in government spending talks without some amount of
wall funding on the table. "There is no Democrat that is willing to give any money for a border barrier
initiative, any substantial other than a dollar, for a border barrier initiative, so why have the discussion?" asked Rep. Mark Meadows
(R-N.C.), chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and a close ally of President Trump. About a quarter of the federal government
has been shut down since Dec. 22, as Trump has demanded $5.7 billion for construction of barriers along the border, and Democrats in
Congress have refused to grant it. GOP senators, most recently Rob Portman (Ohio) and Jerry Moran (Kan.), have proposed measures similar to
the Hurd-Aguilar compromise in an effort to end the shutdown, which on Saturday became the longest in modern U.S. history. But
Democrats, fresh off a big electoral win in November, say their base won't accept such a deal now. "Every time that
we've been [down this road], people on the ground they get their hopes up and they think that maybe there's an answer
there, but this time people are staying pretty firm," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), an immigrant rights activist and co-
chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "They do not trust this president, they do not think that there's a
real deal to be had, number one, and number two, they know that if there was a deal, because of everything he's done and
everything he's said, that it would include some really terrible things," she added. And the shutdown itself has
become a core dividing issue, beyond debate over the wall itself. "At this point, the tactic they're using is so illegitimate
we wouldn't use it for anything they're asking," said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), a freshman lawmaker and rising progressive star.
"Just the idea that they're
holding people's paychecks hostage and throwing a tantrum, I don't care if they
wanted an ice cream cone, we're not going to give it to them," she said. Republicans, on the other hand, view
Democratic leadership as hypocritical for refusing to grant Trump's border wall request, which they see as
similar to past bipartisan border security bills. "In the scope of things, we're not talking about a big chunk of
money. We're talking about concepts that even the folks that are now saying it's a moral issue to not do, they've
supported it in writing, and with votes, and with signing up to discharge petitions," said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), who's played a key role
in previous immigration reform negotiations. Centrist Republicans are frustrated that negotiations have broken down. Rep. Glenn Thompson
(R-Pa.), who early on in last year's border-for-Dreamers negotiations supported a bipartisan deal, said the negotiators are blowing an
opportunity. "These parties that are involved, and it really seems like it boils down to the House and the Senate Democratic leadership and the
president — this is an opportunity I think for Mrs. Pelosi and Mr. Schumer that they're just blowing," said Thompson. "I think there's all kinds of
opportunities here for things ... even just focused and related to immigration, that you could put together," he added. Republicans
have
said they’re unwilling to back a bill to reopen the government that doesn’t have the support of Trump,
who has indicated he’ll veto anything without wall funding included. "Can you find any Democrat in leadership that's
willing to talk about any significant amount of money for a wall? Period. Whether DACA is included or not. When you find them, then we'll have
a discussion about it," Meadows said. And the White House has pulled away from the idea of trying to intertwine
Dreamers and the wall. Vice President Pence Thursday said the administration won't consider a DACA-for-wall
deal, as administration officials believe the Obama-era program won't survive a challenge before the
Supreme Court, though the constitutionality of DACA has so far not been successfully challenged in court. Andrew Hanen, a South Texas
judge who in 2015 ruled against a DACA expansion as well as a partner program, Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA), had the
opportunity to rule against DACA as a whole in August, but refused to do so. Trump rescinded DACA in September 2017 and gave Congress six
months to enact replacement legislation. Congress failed to come to an agreement, but Trump's order was swiftly challenged in the courts, and
a 9th Circuit decision ultimately forced the Department of Homeland Security to continue issuing DACA benefits to new applicants. Given
DACA's success in court so far, some Democrats are flummoxed by the administration's bullish attitude toward a favorable judicial resolution.
"Maybe they realized that people weren't going to take a deal, and so to get involved in a big lengthy negotiation around some ephemeral deal
that never actually turns out to be something that Democrats could accept," said Jayapal. Some Republicans are dismayed that the
administration would seek a court victory rather than a legislative agreement. "I don't agree with that perspective, even though I'm a huge
friend and fan of the vice president. I'm tired of the courts dictating public policy. It's the legislative branch, let's exercise our responsibilities on
this," said Thompson. Ocasio-Cortez said "the administration is grasping at straws." "I don't know if it's because they're trying to cover for
the fact that they can't even offer that — we're going to reject it. We're not going to exchange DACA for a wall. We're not
going to save one part of a family to expend another part. We're not going to separate families. They know we're not going to separate families,
they know we're not going to tolerate that deal and right now they're just grasping for an excuse to not offer it because they know we're
going to reject it," she said.