Obama appeals immigration ruling to Supreme Court

Nor was it surprising that the Justice Department announced on Tuesday that it would appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Elizabeth Wydra, a lawyer with the liberal Constitutional Accountability Center, said conservative and liberal justices alike will be concerned about “courts becoming the battlefield for political disputes” by allowing states to challenge a broad range of federal actions.

Obama’s edict, which he dubbed the “Deferred Action for Parental Arrivals” (DAPA) granted a three-year amnesty to 5 million illegal immigrants on the basis that they had children here in the U.S. This provided incentive for illegals to have anchor babies, children that are considered American citizens by virtue of their birth, even if their parents refuse to assimilate or participate. The Fifth Circuit had promised to expedite its ruling, but the decision took longer than expected. If they do, they would have to decide how much weight to give the court’s 2007 decision in a major environmental case. The NY Times asserts that President Obama would have little time to execute his programs and sign up millions of undocumented immigrants in the remaining months of his presidency.

While a few view this case as an opportunity to address illegal immigration, others note the significant impact that a ruling could have on executive authority on issues that go far beyond immigration.

“The foot dragging of the lower courts to try and run out the clock has delayed justice, but the law and common sense are so clearly on the President’s side that it is only a matter of time before these deferred action programs are fully implemented”, added Gutierrez.

According to the White House, the executive action fell well within Obama’s presidential powers, despite the fact that under the U.S. Constitution, only the Congress makes laws.

It is a question the court would have to answer before it could rule on whether Obama exceeded his presidential powers, as 26 Republican-governed states led by Texas contend, by bypassing a gridlocked Congress and taking unilateral executive action aimed at shielding millions of illegal immigrants from deportation.

The Fifth Circuit agreed on Monday with Hanen’s determination that the states “have standing”.

Others saw the outcome from the opposite perspective, including Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who urged Obama to jettison his “lawless executive amnesty program and start enforcing the law today”. But Texas leaders oppose undocumented immigrants – and, emphatically, they oppose the president. Senator Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican, said the appeals court decision “is yet another confirmation of the lawlessness at the foundation of President Obama’s “legacy-making” initiatives”.