Tweet
Federal judge declares Obama’s immigration actions unconstitutional
A federal judge in western Pennsylvania declared portions of President Barack Obama’s immigration executive actions unconstitutional in an opinion handed down Tuesday.
“The Court holds that the Executive Action is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution,” wrote Judge Arthur Schwab.
Schwab’s opinion, the first addressing Obama’s immigration expansion, says that the president went “beyond prosecutorial discretion,” which the White House had previously said gives the president to act on immigration laws.
The Obama administration’s application of prosecutorial discretion in differing immigrant deportations, the judge argued, could allow future presidents to differ prosecutions in other matters.
“President Obama has stated,” Schwab wrote, “that he is constrained from issuing an Executive Action/Order on immigration because such action would exceed his executive powers… While President Obama’s historic statements are not dispositive of the constitutionality of his Executive Action on immigration, they cause this Court pause.”
The judge also noted that Congress’s inaction on immigration didn’t alter Obama’s constitutional authority.
“Congress’s lawmaking power is not subject to Presidential supervision or control. … Perceived or actual Congressional inaction does not endow legislative power with the Executive.”
The case Schwab ruled on involved an illegal immigrant who was deported and returned to the U.S. — the legal question being whether Obama’s actions protect the individual from future deportation.
Schwab didn’t issue an injunction against Obama’s actions, so it’s unclear what weight the opinion carries.
A separate lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the immigration order, filed by the attorneys general of 24 states, is currently on its way to court in southern Texas. States currently involved include: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
“The Court holds that the Executive Action is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution,” wrote Judge Arthur Schwab.
Schwab’s opinion, the first addressing Obama’s immigration expansion, says that the president went “beyond prosecutorial discretion,” which the White House had previously said gives the president to act on immigration laws.
The Obama administration’s application of prosecutorial discretion in differing immigrant deportations, the judge argued, could allow future presidents to differ prosecutions in other matters.
“President Obama has stated,” Schwab wrote, “that he is constrained from issuing an Executive Action/Order on immigration because such action would exceed his executive powers… While President Obama’s historic statements are not dispositive of the constitutionality of his Executive Action on immigration, they cause this Court pause.”
The judge also noted that Congress’s inaction on immigration didn’t alter Obama’s constitutional authority.
“Congress’s lawmaking power is not subject to Presidential supervision or control. … Perceived or actual Congressional inaction does not endow legislative power with the Executive.”
The case Schwab ruled on involved an illegal immigrant who was deported and returned to the U.S. — the legal question being whether Obama’s actions protect the individual from future deportation.
Schwab didn’t issue an injunction against Obama’s actions, so it’s unclear what weight the opinion carries.
A separate lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the immigration order, filed by the attorneys general of 24 states, is currently on its way to court in southern Texas. States currently involved include: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
Comment