Key question in immigration court fight: Is Obama enforcing deportation laws or changing them?

[Disir]

When President Obama unveiled his plan to help as many as 5 million immigrants “come out of the shadows,” the White House insisted it was not rewriting law but merely exercising “prosecutorial discretion” to decide who should be deported first.

That argument ran off the rails in the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals this week when conservative judges sided with Texas and upheld an order blocking Obama's plan from taking effect.

Despite protests from the president's lawyers, judges portrayed Obama's latest executive action on illegal immigration as a major change in the law and one not approved by Congress.

It “would extend lawful presence to millions of illegal aliens on a class-wide basis,” said Judge Jerry Smith, and “affirmatively confer” a “host of federal and state benefits,” including a Social Security pension and Medicare hospital coverage.

The decision sets the stage for another highly partisan battle in the Supreme Court, with Texas and 25 other Republican-led states on one side and Obama and the Democratic-led states, including California, on the other.

...The 5th Circuit panel affirmed his decision this week, and it did so by relying on a liberal precedent from an environmental case.

Key question in immigration court fight: Is Obama enforcing deportation laws or changing them?

Here we go. Let's hope they hear the case sooner rather than later.

 

[Asclepias]

I figured this would never pass. If you legalize or deport all the illegals the economy would collapse.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That the Executive has prosecutorial discretion with regard to matters of immigration law and enforcement is settled and accepted:

'In Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, 525 U.S. 471 (1999), the Supreme Court affirmed that “in the deportation process, [a]t each stage the Executive has discretion to abandon the endeavor, and at the time [the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA)] was enacted the INS had been engaging in a regular practice (known as “deferred action”) of exercising that discretion for humanitarian reasons or simply for its own convenience…. many provisions of the IIRIRA are aimed at protecting the Executive’s discretion from the courts–indeed, that can fairly be said to be the theme of the legislation.”

These administrative and court decisions have clear basis in legislation. As noted by the Court in Reno, “8 U. S. C. § 1252(g)… restricts judicial review of the Attorney General’s ‘decision or action’ to ‘commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this Act.’” Moreover, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(d) under “Deportable Aliens” explicitly discusses “the authority of the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General to grant a stay of removal or deportation in any case not described in this subsection,” meaning that Congress authorized deportation deferrals.

President Obama's Deportation Deferral Order Is Legal | The Law

Consequently, immigration laws are not being 'changed,' they are being enforced in a manner both appropriate and warranted, allocating limited resources where they can be the most effective and beneficial, in accordance with existing immigration law.

 

[koshergrl]

The fifth circuit says he is supposed to enforce, not change.

And they're right.

 

[the_human_being]

When President Obama unveiled his plan to help as many as 5 million immigrants “come out of the shadows,” the White House insisted it was not rewriting law but merely exercising “prosecutorial discretion” to decide who should be deported first.

That argument ran off the rails in the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals this week when conservative judges sided with Texas and upheld an order blocking Obama's plan from taking effect.

Despite protests from the president's lawyers, judges portrayed Obama's latest executive action on illegal immigration as a major change in the law and one not approved by Congress.

It “would extend lawful presence to millions of illegal aliens on a class-wide basis,” said Judge Jerry Smith, and “affirmatively confer” a “host of federal and state benefits,” including a Social Security pension and Medicare hospital coverage.

The decision sets the stage for another highly partisan battle in the Supreme Court, with Texas and 25 other Republican-led states on one side and Obama and the Democratic-led states, including California, on the other.

...The 5th Circuit panel affirmed his decision this week, and it did so by relying on a liberal precedent from an environmental case.

Key question in immigration court fight: Is Obama enforcing deportation laws or changing them?

Here we go. Let's hope they hear the case sooner rather than later.

For once, a federal judge actually applied the law. He got it right.

 

[charwin95]

My fellow Americans. We are the losers here not the illegals. Either you or I like it or not they are here and they are not leaving.
They are in hiding, working, making money, pay little or no tax, food stamps, free health care, no driver license,no car insurance. Why? because they are qualified for these benefits as low or no income.... But you see them driving expensive SUV, cars and trucks. Wait till you inside these houses.
That said. Why don't we bring them out from hiding so they start paying their fair share? Like taxes, health and car insurance like everyone else, disqualified them from getting all these freebies....
Think about it who are the losers. Obama is a deferred amnesty not a pathway to citizenship. Even republicans supported this idea such as Rubio, Kasich, Bush and Paul Ryan speaker of the house.

Immigration | Paul Ryan

 

[protectionist]

My fellow Americans. We are the losers here not the illegals. Either you or I like it or not they are here and they are not leaving.
They are in hiding, working, making money, pay little or no tax, food stamps, free health care, no driver license,no car insurance. Why? because they are qualified for these benefits as low or no income.... But you see them driving expensive SUV, cars and trucks. Wait till you inside these houses.
That said. Why don't we bring them out from hiding so they start paying their fair share? Like taxes, health and car insurance like everyone else, disqualified them from getting all these freebies....
Think about it who are the losers. Obama is a deferred amnesty not a pathway to citizenship. Even republicans supported this idea such as Rubio, Kasich, Bush and Paul Ryan speaker of the house.

Immigration | Paul Ryan

This is exactly the insanity we must fight against and defeat it, or it will defeat us.

 

[protectionist]

immigration laws are not being 'changed,' they are being enforced in a manner both appropriate and warranted, allocating limited resources where they can be the most effective and beneficial, in accordance with existing immigration law.

What would be "in accordance with existing immigration law" would be Operation Wetback II. A mass deportation program. Let's get started (long overdue).