US Supreme Court to Take On Obama’s Immigration Reforms

The high court has agreed to review the president’s executive action on immigration from 2014, which has since been tied up in court, after 26 states – mainly with Republican governors – challenged the legality of the maneuver.

If allowed to go forward, it would allow people who have lived in the USA for more than five years and who have children who are living in the country legally to apply for work authorisation.

The changes haven’t gone into effect because they’ve been caught up in the court system.

A Supreme Court ruling on the issue is expected by end of June. Obama’s decision to take executive action came after former House Speaker John Boehner told the president that the House would not take up comprehensive immigration-reform legislation.

A conservative panel of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled, first, that Texas was impacted by the orders – giving it legal standing to sue – because it would spend several million dollars on driver’s licenses for the immigrants.

“There are limits to the President’s authority”, Paxon said in a statement shortly after the Supreme Court announced it would hear the case. States are not required to provide any benefits under the President’s executive order.

Determined to circumvent Congress, where immigration reform has always been stalled, Obama announced the measures in November 2014.

The justices said in their order Tuesday that they will also decide whether Obama’s actions violated the constitutional provision requiring the president to “take care that the Laws be faithfully executed”, essentially meaning that they will determine whether current law prohibits Obama from using executive action to enforce broad immigration laws, according to Politico.

Immigration has been a fiercely debated topic throughout the campaign, from Donald Trump’s early calls to deport all illegal immigrants to Democratic candidates’ recent alarm over the administration’s raids in early January, which arrested more than 120 people who had exhausted their legal appeals to stay in the country.

People stand in line hoping to enter the Supreme Court in Washington, Monday, Jan. 11, 2016, for arguments in the “Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association” case.

The administration stated it was exercising prosecutorial discretion by choosing to shield up to 5 million illegal immigrants from deportation. Because of the litigation, DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans) and expanded DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) have been on hold since their inception. Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee, has already pledged to expand upon Mr Obama’s unilateral efforts. She said Obama’s program would “bring law-abiding immigrant families out of the shadows, boost our economy, and make communities safer”.