Bloomberg
By Laurel Brubaker Calkins
July 8, 2015
The
Obama administration has a chance to build on health care and gay
marriage victories before the Supreme Court when it urges an appeals
court to let 5 million undocumented
immigrants stay in America. But it's a slim chance.
On
Friday, the White House will face long odds as it seeks to persuade a
panel of judges to let President Barack Obama's effort to loosen
immigration restrictions take
effect. Two of the three are Republican appointees who rejected a
similar administration bid.
“Those
two judges have already expressed their doubts,” said Sidney Powell, a
Dallas attorney who has appeared for two decades before the U.S. Court
of Appeals in New
Orleans, where the case will be heard. “I’d be surprised if they
changed their minds at this point.”
“Those two judges have already expressed their doubts.”
Sidney Powell
If
Obama wins, opponents have argued that his executive actions may make
some immigrants eligible for Social Security and Medicare. Such an
outcome may energize Republican
presidential contenders who have made his attempt to circumvent
Congress an issue in the 2016 campaign. With few exceptions, those
candidates have opposed giving legal status to undocumented immigrants
and accused Obama of abusing executive authority.
Senators
Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida and New Jersey Governor
Chris Christie have joined scores of other Republicans in asking the New
Orleans court to
block Obama.
Executive Actions
The
president's actions late last year seek to block deportations and
provide work permits to immigrants who’ve been in the country for five
years, if they were brought
here as children or have a child who is a citizen. To qualify, they
also must pass a criminal background check.
Some
26 states led by Texas claim the initiative was lawmaking, which is
traditionally the job of Congress. They obtained an order by a Texas
federal judge blocking implementation
until their challenge is resolved.
In
May, U.S. Circuit Judges Jerry Smith and Jennifer Walker Elrod in New
Orleans ruled the states had the right to sue, and that Obama’s measures
probably broke federal
law. The freeze remained in effect.
This week, lawyers for the government and the states will argue whether the lower court’s order was valid.
Mexican Border
U.S.
District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas, is a George W. Bush
appointee whose courthouse sits a mile from the Mexican border. He has
berated government lawyers,
accused the administration of ignoring court orders and speculated
Obama’s actions were illegal during hearings in his courtroom.
The
judge’s sentiments on that last point were echoed by Smith and Elrod
when they rejected the administration’s earlier effort to suspend
Hanen's ruling and put the initiative
in place.
“The
first panel clearly didn’t think very highly of the White House’s
arguments,” said Seth Kretzer, a Houston lawyer who often argues before
the appeals court. They
may be concerned the president over-reached, in part because he shifted
gears in favor of executive action after losing the mid-term elections.
U.S. Circuit Judge Carolyn King, an appointee of President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, will take the third seat on the panel.
In April, she sided with the administration in a separate immigration case by Mississippi and two border agents.
Fifteen
states and the District of Columbia, along with coalitions of mayors
and police chiefs, have sided with Obama. They claim his program will
boost tax revenue and
aid law enforcement by bringing law-abiding immigrants “out of the
shadows.”
Higher Costs
Taxes from fully employed immigrants would exceed the higher costs of providing more services, the proponents said.
A
victory for Obama would allow the executive action to take effect as
the state challenge heads toward trial before Hanen. It would also
partially fulfill a campaign
promise and help lock in some of the Latino vote for Democrats next
year.
But such a win could be short-lived: the states would likely seek Supreme Court review, and another delay of the initiative.
“We
do want the courts to move expeditiously,” White House Deputy Press
Secretary Eric Schultz has said. “We feel strongly that we are on solid
legal ground.”
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment