Huffington Post (Op-Ed)
By Rep. Zoe Lofgren
July 10, 2015
When
Congress created the Department of Homeland Security, it recognized
that federal resources should be expended to maximize efforts that keep
our country safe. To do
so, Congress directed the executive branch to determine who is a
priority for deportation, and who is not. Since Congress provides only
enough money each year to deport a small percentage of undocumented
people, it allows the Executive Branch broad discretion
to decide who should - and who should not - be removed.
Last
November, President Obama exercised this legal authority when he
introduced a number of initiatives designed to improve our broken
immigration system. He announced
the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA), which would allow qualified parents of U.S. citizens
and lawful permanent residents temporary relief from deportation. He
also announced an expansion to the successful Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative to provide temporary
relief to a broader category of DREAMers, individuals who grew up in the
United States after being brought here many years ago at a young age.
In doing so, the Administration systematically
fulfilled its obligation to set priorities for deportation, as Congress
directed.
However,
Republican Governors and Attorneys General in twenty-six states filed a
lawsuit to block implementation of these efforts. Regardless of the
outcome at the Fifth
Circuit, where the issue is being argued today, I expect that this case
will be resolved by the Supreme Court, as - quite often - the most
important legal questions of the day ultimately are.
The
Supreme Court has already made clear the Administration's broad
authority to determine how to prioritize enforcement of our immigration
laws. Just three years ago,
the Court in Arizona v. United States explained that a "principal
feature of the removal system is the broad discretion exercised by
immigration officials," including as to "whether it makes sense to
pursue removal at all." Furthermore, the Court observed
in 1999 that the Executive has the complete discretion to abandon the
deportation process at any point.
In
fact, the Supreme Court has long held that an "agency generally cannot
act against each technical violation of the statute it is charged with
enforcing," and that "an
agency's decision not to take enforcement action" generally should not
overturned by a court.
Earlier
this year, 180 Members of the House of Representatives joined me in
filing a friend-of-the-court brief that is before the Fifth Circuit
Court. Our brief explains
that as Members of Congress, we believe strongly in the separation of
powers. We frequently defend congressional prerogatives against
executive and judicial overreach. But part of ensuring that the laws are
enforced by the Executive in a manner that is rational,
effective, and faithful to Congressional intent is to make sure that
federal courts honor the deliberate choices made by Congress. We make
that deliberate choice when we vest the executive branch with the
discretionary authority to determine how best to enforce
the law.
That
is precisely the case when it comes to immigration enforcement efforts.
Congress expressly granted the Executive authority to establish
regulations, issue instructions,
set national immigration enforcement policies and priorities, authorize
the employment of noncitizens, and "perform such other acts as he deems
necessary for carrying out his authority." This authority is clear,
unambiguous, and has already withstood judicial
review.
The
President's actions are not only lawful, they are also practical. They
will allow the government to focus limited resources on serious
criminals, recent arrivals,
and threats to national security. They are consistent with basic
American values like accountability, family unity, and compassion.
What's more, they will also provide a tremendous boost to our nation's
economy. A recent study by the Center for American Progress
shows that DAPA and expanded DACA will grow the U.S. economy by $230
billion over 10 years. In my home state of California alone, over that
10-year period, the economy is expected to expand by $75 billion,
increasing the earnings of all state residents by
$39 billion, and creating an annual average of 9,500 jobs.
Democrats,
Republicans, and independents alike support fixing our broken
immigration system in the same ways President Obama's DACA and DAPA
policies address. I am confident
that the President acted well within his legal authority and that the
courts will ultimately vindicate these efforts. In the meantime, how
public officials respond to these commonsense reforms will define and
shape the elections in 2016 and the political landscape
for years to come.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment