Supreme Court to hear Obama’s executive action on immigration

For more information about the case, read our fact sheet “Immigration Relief After Texas v. United States and read stories of Asian Americans impacted by the president’s executive actions”.

The White House has argued that Mr Obama has grounds to introduce the measures because the states have no right to challenge policy in federal court, the administration followed proper procedures and the president has discretion to act on immigration.

For the New York Times, Adam Liptak and Michael D. Shear report on the court’s decision to hear the case. “We in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus are optimistic the Supreme Court will rule in favor of extended DACA and DAPA”.

With some of his major legislative initiatives suffocated by Republican lawmakers, the Democratic president has resorted to executive action to get around Congress on issues including immigration, gun control and the Obamacare healthcare law.

Obama’s program, called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA), would allow illegal immigrants in those categories to remain in the country and apply for work permits if they have been here for at least five years and have not committed felonies or repeated misdemeanors.

In blocking the administration’s immigration program, the lower federal courts did not render decisions on the legal issues surrounding the president’s action.

The president has said the program was the result of years of frustration with Republicans in Congress who had repeatedly refused to support bipartisan Senate legislation to update immigration laws. The Supreme Court will rule on the case in June. “The Supreme Court has weighed in before affirming the role of the executive branch in prioritizing its efforts on immigration, as was decided in the Arizona case a few years ago”.

As many as 5 million of the U.S.’s estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants could ultimately be eligible for deferred action under the Obama plan.

“Like millions of families across this country – immigrants who want to be held accountable, to work on the books, to pay taxes, and to contribute to our society openly and honestly – we are pleased that the Supreme Court has chose to review the immigration case”, said Brandi Hoffine, a White House spokeswoman.

NIJC’s August 2015 survey of 200 IL residents who obtained temporary protection under the 2012 DACA program (which has not been affected by the lawsuit) demonstrated overwhelming benefits for communities when people have access to legal status and are able to pursue work and educational opportunities.

The high court agreed to decide the legality of Obama’s unilateral action to shield more than 4 million illegal immigrants from deportation.

The change means that people who are here illegally but who are not otherwise violating the law are less likely to face deportation.