Supreme Court sets April hearing for immigration case

Ianus · 03-04-2016, 01:35 PM

http://thehill.com/regulation/court-...migration-case

Quote:

The Supreme Court has set a date for oral arguments in a case challenging President Obama’s executive actions on immigration.

The case, United States v. Texas, will be argued on April 18, a Monday.

The programs Obama launched through executive action last year to shield as many as 5 million immigrants from deportation have been on hold since a federal judge ruled that Texas and 25 other states have a legitimate basis to challenge them.

The states argue the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) programs would increase their costs for healthcare, law enforcement and education. Texas specifically claims it would be financially burdened by having to issue more drivers’ licenses, which is now a state-subsidized benefit.

The justices are being asked to weigh whether the actions are illegal and whether a state that voluntarily provides a subsidy to some immigrants has standing to the bring the case.

Because the government argues that the programs serve as guidance for the Department of Homeland Security on which immigrants to deport, the justices will also consider whether that guidance was subject to notice and comment procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Earlier this week, the House said it would vote in the coming weeks on whether to allow Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to file a brief on the legality of the president’s actions. Ryan reportedly said the president is “not permitted to write law — only Congress is.”

“The House will make that very, very clear, and we will do so as an institution on behalf of the American people, on behalf of representative self-government,” he added.

pink · 03-04-2016, 05:05 PM

good find. Just want it to be over already!

Livingthedreamsomewhat · 03-04-2016, 07:35 PM

what happens if it is a tie ... it would stay as before right....

Pianoswithoutfaith · 03-04-2016, 10:05 PM

If it's a tie then nothing happens if we lose then stuff is about to get real

DACA-IR-DA · 03-05-2016, 02:36 AM

So it is a one day hearing? Either it is 5-3 or 4-4 right? 4-4 is a loss.

Who is the new justice? Will he/she vote that Obama appoints? If yes, then it is going to be a win at 5-3 most likely.

IamAman · 03-05-2016, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livingthedreamsomewhat

what happens if it is a tie ... it would stay as before right....

The 5th court ruling stands, BUT it doesn't sent a precedent and the case can be reviewed again...

TexasDreamy · 03-05-2016, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DACA-IR-DA

So it is a one day hearing? Either it is 5-3 or 4-4 right? 4-4 is a loss.

Who is the new justice? Will he/she vote that Obama appoints? If yes, then it is going to be a win at 5-3 most likely.

There is no new justice. The senate has said that it won't confirm a new justice until we have a new president.

DACA-IR-DA · 03-05-2016, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAman

The 5th court ruling stands, BUT it doesn't sent a precedent and the case can be reviewed again...

If it is a tie when it looks like a worst case scenario possible at this point.

Case reviewed when after that decision and where?

DACA-IR-DA · 03-05-2016, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAman

The 5th court ruling stands, BUT it doesn't sent a precedent and the case can be reviewed again...

Quote:

Originally Posted by TexasDreamy

There is no new justice. The senate has said that it won't confirm a new justice until we have a new president.

This hurts our chances right?

TexasDreamy · 03-05-2016, 05:49 PM

Well right now there hasn't been any sort of trial over the DAPA action. The only thing under consideration is whether or not there can be an injunction against the executive order while the trial goes underway.

The fifth district court has upheld the injunction so Obama administration went to SCOTUS to ask whether or not an injunction is needed while the original trial is underway.

So.... it's way better that we're a justice down. Scalia would've been a definite no. In that case it would've likely been 4/5-against.

This would mean that the injunction would remain in place and this lawsuit would "run out the clock" on Obama's executive order. So if we have a republican president next, that president could not renew the executive order and then the suit would be dropped because it would no longer be opposing an executive order.

Now we're looking at a 4-4 split (which would be the same thing as upholding the injunction...), but I think we're more likely to see a 5-3.

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31

They need you!

Forum links

Resources

Join our list

National calendar of events

March

Supreme Court sets April hearing for immigration case