Key Issue at Supreme Court Immigration Hearing: Drivers License Fees

Instructive read from WSJ today (4/13/16):

http://www.wsj.com/articles/key-issu...ees-1460539801

"
WASHINGTON—The 26-state challenge to the Obama administration’s immigration policy, scheduled for Supreme Court argument next Monday comes wrapped in rhetoric about the separation of powers and brims with implications for the November elections.

But the outcome may hinge on something more mundane: Texas drivers license fees.

That is because the states’ legal ability—known as standing—to bring the case rests on Texas’ claim that it would be required to subsidize the cost of licenses to people qualifying for the Obama administration’s plan, called the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans, which would provide work authorizations and a temporary reprieve on deportation to millions of illegal immigrants whose children are U.S. citizens.

....

A federal district judge in Brownsville, Texas, approved the Texas challenge on the drivers-license basis, and in February 2015 issued a nationwide injunction barring the program’s implementation. Last November, the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld the injunction, based on the claim that the Department of Homeland Security failed to follow proper administrative procedures in issuing the policy.

.....

The Supreme Court has been taking pains to reach consensus decisions following the February death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, which left the court with eight justices and increased the chance of 4-4 splits. The standing issue—one of tremendous importance to several of the court’s justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts—could offer an escape route to avoid a potential tie.

“I think this is going to end up being another civil procedure case where we’re talking about what standing means, with nothing to do with immigration altogether,” said Kit Johnson, a law professor at the University of Oklahoma.

.......

If the court deadlocks 4-4, the lower court injunctions would remain in place, likely freezing the program for the remainder of the Obama administration and into the next presidency.

Is this a good sign to be in our favor?

Potentially yes.

The case will be about standing, and whether Texas can prove it has it or not.

If the case can be caste not as an immigration issues - which it isn't on its original legal merits - but considered rather on the narrow grounds of whether or whether not Texas has standing to sue or challenge the Federal government policy, and thereby issue an injunction, based solely on the potential costs of issuing driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants, then Justices such as Kennedy might be critical of it, as they have done in the past.

The current case was never about the constitutionality of the Executive exercising prosecutorial discretion (i.e. altering immigration enforcement). It was initiated with Texas claiming potential pecuniary injury due to issuing drivers licenses to undocumented immigrants under the new policy

I am hearing articles on either 4-4 or 5-3. Not 3-5 though. 4-4 still has a chance but that will delay another year or two.

In reality, it should be 8-0 or 0-8 right? Either it is or it isn't.

Si señora

It can be argued that the Driver's license situation is a self inflicted wound because Texas could easily treat DACA holders the same as others where even if they do take a hit, they could just eat up the cost as public safety; They could charge the full price for a DL (like $25 more or something); or they could not give DACA holders a driver's license at all if they want to be jerks.

Big day tomorrow!

What day?

He is referring to the Supreme Court ruling ... it's happening right now.