Texas Leading Weasel Boogle Against Immigrants (Surprise, Surprise, Surprise)

DAPA Program and Some Americans in Serious Jeopardy

GOPers have no “illegals” (of any kind) in their family trees, right???

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Supreme Court hears today an historical case that tests the boundaries of presidential powers and persons here illegally under the DAPA program (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans or Parents of Lawful Permanent Residents). The basic question is whether or not President Obama exceeded his authority with unilateral action to spare some 4 million here illegally from deportation under DAPA, which most Republicans simply advocate deporting all of the estimated 11 million people in the country illegally, citizen children or not, lawful residents or not.

Obama's DAPA plan and decision to implement: That decision arose out of frustration within the White House and the immigrant community about a lack of action to reform immigration and fix this huge problem with such a polarized and divided Washington, DC who constantly fail to address the status of people here illegally or perceived to be here illegally. Not only DAPA which has drawn Republican ire saying Mr. Obama goes around Congress on immigration policy, but and other matters like gun control and the ACA (Obama-care) health care law, which the high court has upheld twice and congress has failed over 60 times to repeal.

(Note: Yet this same GOP-led Congress just sits on their collective hands and does nothing, including not even willing to hear Judge Garland, the nominee to replace Scalia, make his case for appointment, and they have the gall to get paid for not doing their job. They hope the GOP wins the W/H in Nov and then they will move ahead with the choice they obvious want. What if they don’t win the W/H – what then – sustained stalemate?).

Why the Obama plan: Mr. Obama took action after GOP House killed bipartisan legislation, the biggest overhaul of immigration laws in decades that would have provided a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants that has already passed the Senate in 2013. DAPA is tailored to let roughly 4 million people – those who have lived illegally in the United States least since 2010, have no criminal records, and have children who are U.S. citizens by birth, or who are lawful permanent residents. Obama’s plan shields them from deportation and supplies work permits.

Case against the Obama plan: It pits Obama against 26 states led by Texas that filed suit to block his 2014 immigration plan.  Shortly before DAPA was to go into effect last year, a federal judge in Texas blocked it after the Republican-governed states filed suit against it and the Obama executive action. Then the New Orleans-based 5th Court of Appeals upheld that decision in November. Now, the high court is evenly divided raising the possibility of a 4-4 split that would leave in place the lower-court ruling that threw out the president's executive action.

From the HILL: If the justices cannot reach a majority decision, they say states, cities and activist groups could launch a new round of legal challenges in other courts to try to fight the injunction, imposed by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen of Texas and upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (New Orleans), also known as the most conservative appeals court in the country. 

The states could argue that they would be deprived of economic benefits of the programs. 

A coalition of 118 cities and counties, including New York City, filed a legal brief last month arguing they could miss out on around $800 million in economic benefits to state and local governments if millions if large numbers of immigrants remain subject to deportation.

Other legal experts call that scenario far-fetched, saying cities and states lack legal standing to bring such a suit based on potential lost benefits.

Immigrant rights groups are hopeful it won’t come a sad or tie decision. Many of them are confident of a victory with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy likely voting in favor of the Obama administration, saying the states can’t act on this fundamentally a Federal issue.

If not in favor of DAPA, then for all GOP gun nuts: Imagine 11 million people here taking their guns to the streets and demanding action anyway possible? What then – a simple oops won’t work. Sound far-fetched … think again.