Divided court denies emergency stay of injunction stopping Obama's immigration executive order
“We knew since the beginning that this was going to be a tough battle,” Erika Andiola, co-director of the Dream Action Coalition, an immigrant rights group, said in a statement. “Republicans strategically chose this conservative judge [Hanen] whom they knew would delay implementation and try to intimidate our community. We, however, were the ones who pressured the president, knowing it is a constitutional move, and we continue to be confident that we will win at the end.”
Ben Johnson, the executive director of the American Immigration Council, yesterday commented on the decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals:
“Today’s 2-1 decision is indefensible, and we remain confident that the majority’s legal reasoning will not stand. The federal courts have long recognized that the Executive Branch has authority to set enforcement priorities, that is, to exercise prosecutorial discretion, just like all other law enforcement agencies. In fact, since at least 1956, every U.S. President has granted temporary immigration relief from deportation.
“Judge Stephen A. Higginson, in his dissent, got it right when he called out the ‘political nature of this dispute’ and argued that the courts have no role to play here. The courts simply cannot be a venue for anyone who disagrees with a President’s policy choice. The district court in Washington, D.C., understood this when it promptly dismissed Sheriff Arpaio’s similar suit challenging DACA and DAPA. To create a precedent that would allow state politicians to challenge a federal immigration decision they disagreed with, based on the fact that they might have to issue a driver’s license to the beneficiary of that policy, is absurd and unworkable.
“Every day that DAPA and expanded DACA implementation is delayed is a day in which families are forced to live in uncertainty and under the constant threat of possible deportation. Delaying implementation also means delaying substantial economic benefits to our country. The overwhelming weight of the evidence clearly indicates that DAPA and expanded DACA will increase Gross Domestic Product, reduce the federal deficit, and raise both tax revenue and average wages.
“Finally, today’s decision serves as reminder that broader, permanent reform is needed. Congress must do its job to enact immigration legislation that provides undocumented immigrants a full and meaningful shot at citizenship, helps the United States grow its economic prosperity, and reflects our proud history as a nation of immigrants.”
The Washington Post notes that the appeals court ruling was a setback to Obama’s immigration agenda and left it unclear when the administration would be able to begin implementing the new program. Hanen has not indicated when he will rule on the constitutionality of the program, but he did not conceal his sharp criticism of the president’s immigration actions.
No matter how Hanen rules, the case is likely to drag on for months on appeal and may not even be settled until after Obama leaves office in January 2017. The Justice Department is evaluating the ruling and will consider its next steps, administration officials said.
