Republican-led House backs challenge to Obama on immigration

pavpatel · 03-17-2016, 09:27 PM

Quote:

The House voted on Thursday to embrace the legal challenge to President Barack Obama's actions on immigration in an election-year fight over executive authority and the 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally that has roiled the Republican Party.

Republicans who hold a commanding majority cast the issue as Obama exceeding his constitutional authority in unilaterally expanding programs for immigrants. They prevailed on a 234-186 vote that authorizes their leader, Speaker Paul Ryan, to file a friend-of-the-court brief in the case of United States v. Texas.

A lawsuit from 26 states, led by Texas, challenges Obama's actions, with the Supreme Court set to hear arguments next month and possibly rule in June.

"It is about the integrity of our Constitution," said Ryan, who maintained that any changes in the immigration system rests with Congress acting legislatively. "Those lines — that separation of powers — could not be clearer. But in recent years, the executive branch has blurred these boundaries, to the point of overstepping them altogether."

Democrats argued that Republicans are following the lead of Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump. He has called for removing millions of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, accused some Mexican immigrants of being rapists and murderers, and pledged to get Mexico to build a wall along the U.S. border.

Immigration bitterly divided the Republican presidential candidates, with Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio calling on candidates to soften their tone. Bush quit the presidential race last month and Rubio abandoned his bid on Tuesday.

"Why does the majority party not just say what they want? They want millions of immigrants deported," said Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a Democrat. "Out on the campaign trail on immigration we get lies and demagoguery from Republicans — plural."

After losing the Hispanic vote badly in the 2012 election, Republican leaders insisted that the party needed to be more inclusive for a diverse electorate if it had any hope of winning the presidency. A bipartisan group of senators, including Rubio, crafted a broad overhaul of immigration that boosted border security, increased visas for legal immigrants and a provided a path to citizenship for the 11 million immigrants living in the country illegally.

The Senate approved the legislation, but the measure stalled in the House despite initial efforts that were quickly abandoned by former Speaker John Boehner. then-Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Ryan, all Republicans. l.

Faced with the failure of the legislation, Obama acted in late 2014 to allow people who have been in the United States more than five years and who have children in the country legally to "come out of the shadows and get right with the law." He also announced the expansion of a program that affects people who came here illegally as children.

"The president has the right to take these administrative actions under the law," House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Thursday on the House floor in arguing that former Republican President Ronald Reagan went further in his actions on immigration in the 1980s.

Outraged Republicans accused Obama of executive overreach and pointed to his previous steps to unilaterally changes his health care law. The GOP complained that Obama was behaving like a monarch, a criticism that energizes Republican voters.

http://news.yahoo.com/gop-led-house-...165338144.html

conscientiatesla87 · 03-18-2016, 12:32 AM

Here we go with these clowns.

DACA-IR-DA · 03-18-2016, 01:14 AM

This means what for DACA?

2MoreYears · 03-18-2016, 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DACA-IR-DA

This means what for DACA?

What does IR stands for

Pianoswithoutfaith · 03-18-2016, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DACA-IR-DA

This means what for DACA?

IamAman · 03-18-2016, 11:50 AM

In all honesty, every one of those SCOTUS justices has likely already made up his/her mind about their vote so none of these things matter except for them to use it to justify it later.

EdoIsa · 03-18-2016, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAman

In all honesty, every one of those SCOTUS justices has likely already made up his/her mind about their vote so none of these things matter except for them to use it to justify it later.

I agree, they are all anxiously waiting for voting day.

DACA-IR-DA · 03-19-2016, 01:47 AM

4-4 or 5-3 right?

pavpatel · 04-06-2016, 01:20 AM

This whole supreme court hearing thing is confusing me. I know there were two executive actions by Obama. The initial one (DACA) that helped all us kids and then the second (DAPA) that helped our parents and others. So just to clarify, this case is only about DAPA? Or is it about both? Also, if the ruling is not in our favor, what does that mean exactly? Will we lose the EADs we have now? Will they become invalid instantly? Or will we just not be able to renew after these expire? I'm just really confused. Thanks in advance.

Pianoswithoutfaith · 04-06-2016, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pavpatel

This whole supreme court hearing thing is confusing me. I know there were two executive actions by Obama. The initial one (DACA) that helped all us kids and then the second (DAPA) that helped our parents and others. So just to clarify, this case is only about DAPA? Or is it about both? Also, if the ruling is not in our favor, what does that mean exactly? Will we lose the EADs we have now? Will they become invalid instantly? Or will we just not be able to renew after these expire? I'm just really confused. Thanks in advance.

DACA
ExDACA
DAPA

remove DACA

ExDACA/DAPA = EXPA

okay, so basically some judge challanged exPA and stopped it from implementing saying that it was too quick and states needed time. It froze basically. So Obama or someone challenged that and it got taken the Supreme court. The Supreme court said it would hear it on April 20 something. In short terms, the big court is finding out if by doing EXPA he is following the constitution which is what I think is the main reason why that judge stopped it. Obama's Team is saying that yes it is and the other group is saying hes not. On April 20th, the court will decide. If the court decides that Obama is in fact following the constitution then EXPA is a go. If it doesn't, then EXPA doesn't get to happen.

Normally, if EXPA was a completely non immigration/DACA related thing it would affect DACA. But it is, the Supreme Court cannot say Obama us not following the constitution with EXPA with out affecting DACA because they are in essence the same thing.

Now some users have cried their hearts our saying DACA is untouchable, it cannot be destroyed, but law experts have said if the court is not in our favor, there goes DACA. Republicans can easily challenge it and they would win. Because they would be using the same ruling the big S finds for EXPA.

So, yes it's going to affect us who have DACA if it doesnt go the EXPAs way

They need you!

Forum links

Resources

Join our list

National calendar of events

February

Republican-led House backs challenge to Obama on immigration