The future of undocumented immigrants could hinge on a case before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Advertisement
President Obama’s controversial executive actions on immigration were challenged in the Supreme Court on Monday.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth District upheld the injunction that led to the Obama administration to seek relief from the U.S. Supreme Court.
House leaders won’t offer an acceptable compromise on immigration, bowing instead to the most strident conservatives in the GOP caucus, and worrying about backlash among some voters in an election year in which Republican presidential candidates have acted like demagogues on the issue. “All of this is very risky for small businesses because they don’t have the notice and comment period to, at the very least, voice their concerns before new regulations go into effect”.
But the supreme court’s decision on DACA and DAPA could help many undocumented immigrants live without fear, at least for a short while.
The Supreme Court will announce its decision this summer, probably in June.
Marcy Suarez, a 20-year-old who was shielded from deportation by a previous executive action that is not in dispute now, said she hopes the court takes into account what she calls the humanitarian dimension of the issue.
Texas has more immigrants who might be affected than any other state in the country.
Obama’s initiatives, proponents say, could open up better jobs for thousands of undocumented people in the Inland area.
“I’m encouraged today. I feel like the justices are going to support Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution”, Paxton said, “which requires the laws be faithfully executed by the President of the United States and that he doesn’t have the authority to make law”.
Luz Gallegos chants during a Pro-immigration activists gathering at Main St.in Riverside on Monday, April 18, 2016. The principal mission of the Lawyers’ Committee is to secure, through the rule of law, equal justice under law, particularly in the areas of fair housing and community development; employment; voting; education; environmental justice; and criminal justice. “So inevitably, priorities have to be set”, she said.
Advertisement
Kagan suggested perhaps Texas brought the wrong suit – it challenged the executive action creating this deferred action, when it should have separately challenged the regulation that gives deferred action recipients the ability to work legally.
