The United States Supreme Court heard arguments for and against President Obama’s immigration programs on April 18, while the bench was seemingly divided over the matter.
Advertisement
While it’s impossible to glean how the court will ultimately decide the case, the eight justices seemed evenly split along ideological lines during oral arguments, leaving a real possibility of a 4-4 tie.
According to an article by Voice of America, the United States v. Texas case will analyze the legality of President Obama’s executive decision to establish Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA).
Mercado says she has to renew her DACA every three years and was the first of DACA student from TAMIU to study overseas in Ireland. “It’s as if … the president is setting the policy and the Congress is executing it”, he said.
“Definitely not”, Verrilli said.
It was not clear whether Roberts was satisfied with the answer and subsequent explanation. Olivares, who works in fast-food, has two children who are USA citizens.
He also announced the expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).
This year the Obama administration has escalated raids to detain and deport undocumented immigrants.
Other justices questioned why Congress provides only enough money to deport about 400,000 people annually.
“I’m here to ask those that have the power, those that are making the decisions that they understand that they understand that my children here as citizens and they deserve to live as other citizens”.
Morales doesn’t have a criminal record, which makes him eligible for President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Parental Accountability, or DAPA.
But the Obama administration fought back, claiming the states don’t have standing, or legal authority, to sue the federal government over immigration policy.
Verrilli told the justices that they could get rid of the phrase and essentially leave the programs unchanged. I don’t think any mother would want anything like that to happen.
Murphy, representing House Republicans, said it wasn’t that simple.
“How the arguments go doesn’t always predict what the outcome of the case will be”. The court issued a nationwide injunction.
Attorneys for Texas argued Monday their efforts to stop President Obama’s action aren’t about deportations or specific immigration policy, but about the rule of law and presidential overreach.
“Today our immigration system is broken and everybody knows it”, Obama said at the time.
Advertisement
The president already decreed in 2012 that children who entered the US before 2007 could get work permits and they would be temporarily spared from deportation.
