Congress might be holding hearings on Obama's mini-amnesty for up to (and maybe more than) 300,000 illegal aliens. From this unverified article [1]:

..(Elton Gallegly) and (Michael McCaul) will be conducting hearings as soon as Congress reconvenes. McCaul told American Thinker that he hopes to enact legislation that prevents the president from implementing this directive and will look to see if it is in violation of existing law. Gallegly, chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Policy, will focus on how the president is selectively enforcing certain laws by picking and choosing. He wants to demonstrate to "Americans that those the president claims to protect, the most vulnerable in our society, are the ones he is hurting more than anyone. We need to eliminate the carrots, the incentives, and the rewards for violating the laws. One of my jobs is to provide information to inform the American people about the real facts, the real numbers, and the real impact. The lack of laws is not the problem, but rather the lack of enforcement."

Hearings would be a good thing, but it's hardly a sure thing that they'd have any impact. The smarter, quicker, cheaper, and far more effective way to resolve this matter is to discredit any leaders (broadly defined) who support Obama's mini-amnesty. One way to do that is to hold Democratic leaders to their ideals. They supposedly represent working Americans, but here they are supporting a plan that would have a negative impact on working Americans and the unemployed. Discredit them to their supporters by pointing out what they're doing and challenging them face-to-face, in comments sections, or on Twitter.

For a tangible example, see my two and a half year old open letter to the Center for American Progress. In those two and a half years, I've gotten very little help with that plan and with the letter, despite the fact that at the least holding it over CAP could be used to show just how fake they are. I.e., they claim to represent workers, but their policies would harm workers. If I'd gotten more help with that, the desired response from CAP would be something like, "we better support reduced immigration or we're going to look bad to our supporters." Obviously, that's not going to work if almost no one else is willing to promote the plan and the letter.

Hearings come and go, but it's very rare to find those willing to challenge opponents on their fundamental ideas with the goal of discrediting those ideas and reducing the popularity of those ideas. Unless an actual law results from the hearings, they aren't likely to have as much an impact as other, smarter things that use leverage. See question authority for more.

------------------
[1] americanthinker . com/2011/09/
obamas_immigration_directive_to_face_congressional_hearings.html Note that I was banned from American Thinker for criticizing them on this site. So, no link for them.