fbpx
Wikipedia

United States v. Texas (2016)

August 23, 2023

United States v. Texas, 579 U.S. ___ (2016), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) program.

United States v. Texas
Argued April 18, 2016
Decided June 23, 2016
Full case nameUnited States of America, et al., Petitioners v. State of Texas, et al.
Docket no.15-674
Citations579 U.S. ___ (more)
136 S. Ct. 2271; 195 L. Ed. 2d 638
Case history
PriorIssuing preliminary injunction, 86 F. Supp. 3d 591 (S.D. Tex. 2015); stay denied, 787 F.3d 733 (5th Cir. 2015); preliminary injunction affirmed, 809 F.3d 134 (5th Cir. 2015); cert. granted, 136 S. Ct. 906 (2016).
Holding
The judgment was affirmed by an equally divided court.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Anthony Kennedy · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
Case opinion
Per curiam
Laws applied
Take Care Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Administrative Procedure Act, United States immigration legislation from 1952, 1965, 1986, 1990, 1996, etc.

In a one-line per curiam decision, an equally divided Court affirmed the lower-court injunction blocking the President's program. The case was decided by an eight-member bench due to the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.

Background

On June 27, 2013, the U.S. Senate's Gang of Eight successfully passed its comprehensive immigration reform bill in the Senate.[1][2] However, the Republican-controlled House did not initially act on the Senate's bill.[3][4] When pressed during an interview on Univision in March 2014, to take unilateral executive action to limit deportations, President Barack Obama replied "until Congress passes a new law, then I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do".[5]

On June 9, 2014, House Whip Kevin McCarthy announced that House Republicans had enough votes to pass the bill.[1][6] However, the next day House Majority Leader Eric Cantor lost his primary election. So on June 30, Speaker John Boehner announced that he would not bring the bill to a vote.[1] That same day, President Obama delivered remarks in the White House Rose Garden promising to "fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own, without Congress".[1][7]

Over the next four months, the Obama Administration went through sixty iterations of different possible executive actions.[8] Finally, on November 20, 2014, President Obama delivered a primetime televised address to the nation announcing DAPA.[9][10] The Office of Legal Counsel advised that the program was constitutional, finding it was similar to President George H. W. Bush's 1990 "Family Fairness" program.[11] Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson then released two memorandums directing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Bureau to make aliens who lacked criminal histories the lowest priority for removal,[12] and to grant deferred action to illegal immigrants who are the parents of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.[13]

The President's program, when combined with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, would have delayed the deportation of slightly less than half of the 11 million undocumented aliens in the United States.[14] The New York Times reported that "more than 10 million people live in households with at least one potentially DAPA-eligible adult" and that "two-thirds of these adults have lived in the United States for at least 10 years".[14] Over half the undocumented aliens eligible for the President's delayed deportation live in California, Texas, and New York.[14]

Two weeks later, the Attorney General of Texas Greg Abbott, whose was suit joined by twenty-six other states, sued in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.[1] Of the 3.6 million illegal aliens eligible for DAPA, 2.2 million reside in states that did not join the lawsuit.[14]

United States District Court

On February 16, 2015, United States District Judge Andrew S. Hanen in Brownsville, Texas, issued a preliminary injunction against an executive action taken by President Barack Obama that would have given illegal immigrants legal status and protection and let them apply for work permits.[why?][15][16][17] The U.S. government on February 23, 2015, asked the Court to lift the injunction while it appealed his ruling to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans;[18][19] it also proposed that the Court could issue a partial stay that would allow every state except for Texas to start implementing DAPA.[19]

In an opinion and order published on April 7, 2015, Hanen denied the Government's request to stay the preliminary injunction.[20]: 15  He affirmed the earlier ruling that the plaintiff states had standing;[20]: 3–7  cited statements made by President Obama regarding the applicability of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) that DHS employees would "suffer consequences" if they failed to follow the DHS Directive;[further explanation needed][20]: 7–11  denied the DOJ request to apply for the injunction only to Texas;[20]: 11–12  and addressed[vague] the issue of irreparable harm with regard to both the federal government and to the states.[20]: 13–14 

On the same day, the Court issued a separate order criticizing the federal government for granting three-year periods of deferred action to 108,081 individuals between the announcement of DAPA and the preliminary injunction,[21]: 3 [20]: 2  despite earlier statements made to the court by the Department of Justice that no action would be taken on these applications.[21]: 2  The Court reserved the right to impose sanctions against the federal government's counsel for misrepresenting facts.[21]: 9 

United States Court of Appeals

The Obama Administration appealed the order for a preliminary injunction and asked the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans to stay the district court's injunction pending appeal.[22] On May 26, 2015, the administration's motion for a stay was denied by a divided three-member motions panel, over a dissent by Judge Stephen A. Higginson, meaning that the government could not implement DAPA until the Fifth Circuit ruled on the appeal of the injunction order itself.[23][24][25] Arguments were heard on an expedited basis on July 10, 2015. On November 9, 2015, a three-member panel of the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction, over one dissent.[26][27]

The divided circuit court affirmed the preliminary injunction and ordered the case back to the district court for trial.[28] Judge Jerry Edwin Smith, joined by Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod agreed with the district court that Texas has standing because of the cost of issuing driver's licenses to aliens and that President Obama's order violated the rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.[28] The majority made a new finding that the Immigration and Nationality Act "flatly does not permit" deferred action.[29] Judge Carolyn Dineen King dissented, arguing that prosecutorial discretion makes the case non-justiciable, and that there had been "no justification" for the circuit court's delay in the ruling.[29]

Supreme Court of the United States

On November 10, 2015, the Justice Department announced it would ask the Supreme Court to reverse.[30] Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton attempted to prolong consideration of the case until the next October term but the Supreme Court only granted him an eight-day extension to file his opposition brief.[31] The Justice Department further hastened the case by waiving its right to file a reply brief.[32] On January 19, 2016, the Supreme Court agreed to review the case.[33] The Court took the unusual step of asking for a briefing on the new constitutional question as to whether or not DAPA violates the Take Care Clause.[34]

Due to the subsequent death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the case was decided by eight justices. On April 18, 2016, the Court heard ninety minutes of oral arguments from Donald B. Verrilli Jr., the Solicitor General of the United States, an attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund as an intervenor in support of the Government, Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller for the several states, and a Bancroft PLLC attorney representing the United States House of Representatives as a friend of Texas.[35] Commentators complained that the arguments were "one of the most flagrant examples in recent memory of a naked political dispute masquerading as a legal one".[36]

On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court announced it had deadlocked 4–4 in a decision that read, in its entirety, "The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court."[37][38] The ruling set no precedent and simply left in place the lower court's preliminary injunction blocking the program.[38] The case may reach the Supreme Court again after Judge Hanen has held a trial.[38]

President Obama immediately held a press conference criticizing the decision, where he blamed "spasms of politics around immigration and fear-mongering" as well as Senate Republicans for refusing to consider his nominee for the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland.[38][39] Former acting Solicitor General Walter Dellinger observed "seldom have the hopes of so many been crushed by so few words".[38] Texas Attorney General Paxton praised the result because "This is a major setback to President Obama's attempts to expand executive power, and a victory for those who believe in the separation of powers and the rule of law."[38]

Further developments

Sanctions on Department of Justice attorneys

While the case was awaiting a decision from the United States Supreme Court, trial court judge Hanen issued a temporary hold on three-year renewals of work authorization for some illegal immigrants.[40] The federal government gave three-year renewals of work authorization for 2,500 young, illegal immigrants, despite Judge Hanen's order.[40] The federal government later reversed the three-year extensions for those 2,500 people, and attorneys for the Department of Justice said the renewals of work authorizations were made in error.[40] Judge Hanen accused the attorneys of purposely misleading his court, he barred them from appearing in his courtroom, he demanded ethics classes for the attorneys, and he ordered other sanctions for those who argued the case in his courtroom.[41] Judge Hanen also ordered Attorney General Loretta Lynch to appoint someone within the department to ensure compliance with his order.[41]

Trump administration

On November 18, 2016, attorneys for both parties filed a joint motion to stay proceeding until one month after President Donald Trump's inauguration.[42] On June 15, 2017, new Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly signed a memo rescinding DAPA, ending the matter.[43] DHS's announcement clarified that the new memo does not affect Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, leading the White House to announce it had not decided if it will or will not keep that other policy.[44] However, on September 5, 2017, the Trump Administration announced that they planned to end DACA if Congress was unable to pass it into law within six months.[45]

References

  1. ^ a b c d e Josh Blackman, "The Supreme Court, 2015 Term — Comment: Gridlock", 130 Harv. L. Rev. 241 (2016).
  2. ^ S. 744, 113th Cong. (2013).
  3. ^ "S.744 - Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act". Congress.gov. 27 June 2013. Retrieved 5 September 2017.
  4. ^ Keeling, Drew (2014), "Immigration Reform Issues Since 2013", Migration as a travel business
  5. ^ Shear, Michael D.; Preston, Julia (29 November 2016). "Obama Pushed 'Fullest Extent' of His Powers on Immigration Plan". The New York Times. p. A1. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
  6. ^ "Frontline: Immigration Battle". PBS Television broadcast October 20, 2015. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
  7. ^ "President Obama delivers remarks on border security and immigration reform from the White House Rose Garden". YouTube. The White House. June 30, 2014. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
  8. ^ "Anna Palmer, Seung Min Kim & Carrie Budoff Brown, How Obama Got Here", Politico (November 20, 2014).
  9. ^ Adam B. Cox & Cristina M. Rodríguez, "The President and Immigration Law Redux", 125 Yale L.J. 104, 155 (2015).
  10. ^ "In an address to the nation, President Obama lays out the executive action he's taking to fix our nation's broken immigration system". YouTube. The White House. November 20, 2014. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
  11. ^ "The Dep't of Homeland Sec.'s Auth. to Prioritize Removal of Certain Aliens Unlawfully Present in the U.S. and to Defer Removal of Others" (PDF). 38 Op. O.L.C. 14. Department of Justice. 2014-11-19. Archived from the original on April 2, 2015.
  12. ^ Memorandum from Jeh Charles Johnson, Secretary, Department of Homeland Sec., to Thomas S. Winkowski, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al., Policies for the Apprehension, Detention and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants, [[Department of Homeland Security, November 20, 2014.
  13. ^ Memorandum from Jeh Charles Johnson, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, to León Rodríguez, Dir., U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services et al., Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children and with Respect to Certain Individuals Who Are the Parents of U.S. Citizens or Permanent Residents, Department of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson November 20, 2014.
  14. ^ a b c d Park, Haeyoun; Parlapiano, Alicia (23 June 2016). "Supreme Court's Decision on Immigration Case Affects Millions of Unauthorized Immigrants". The New York Times. Retrieved 25 June 2016.
  15. ^ Texas v. United States, 86 F. Supp. 3d 591 (S.D. Tex. 2015).
  16. ^ Barbash, Fred (February 17, 2015). "Federal Judge in Texas Blocks Obama Immigration Orders". The Washington Post. Retrieved February 24, 2015.
  17. ^ Preston, Julia & Shear, Michael (February 17, 2015). "Dealt Setback, Obama Puts Off Immigrant Plan". The New York Times. Retrieved February 24, 2015.
  18. ^ Tatia Woldt, "26-state coalition, led by Texas, asks judge to not lift stay in immigration lawsuit", Dallas Morning News, 4 March 2015
  19. ^ a b cmgdigital.com: "Case 1:14-cv-00254 Document 150 - Defendants' Emergency Expedited Motion to Stay the Court's February 16, 2015 Order Pending Appeal and Supporting Memorandum", February 23, 2015
  20. ^ a b c d e f Texas v. United States, No. 1:14-cv-00254 (S.D. Tex. April 7, 2015).
  21. ^ a b c Texas v. United States, No. 1:14-cv-00254 (S.D. Tex. April 7, 2015).
  22. ^ "House Democrats Encourage Representatives To Keep Holding Events On Obama Immigration Actions", The Huffington Post, February 19, 2015.
  23. ^ Nakamura, David. "Obama administration won't seek emergency stay from Supreme Court on immigration injunction", The Washington Post, May 27, 2015.
  24. ^ Kalhan, Anil (June 3, 2015). "Executive Action on Immigration and the Judicial Artifice of 'Lawful Presence'". Dorf on Law.
  25. ^ Texas v. United States, 787 F.3d 733 (5th Cir. 2015).
  26. ^ Texas v. United States, 809 F.3d 134 (5th Cir. 2015).
  27. ^ Shear, Michael D. (November 9, 2015). "Appeals Court Deals Blow to Obama's Immigration Plans". New York Times. Retrieved November 9, 2015.
  28. ^ a b Lind, Dara (10 November 2015). "Obama's immigration executive actions are up to the Supreme Court". Vox. Retrieved 12 November 2015.
  29. ^ a b Ford, Matt (10 November 2015). "A Ruling Against the Obama Administration on Immigration". The Atlantic. Retrieved 12 November 2015.
  30. ^ Shear, Michael D. (November 10, 2015). "Obama appeals immigration ruling to Supreme Court". New York Times. Retrieved November 10, 2015.
  31. ^ Lyle Denniston, "States get a bit more time for immigration reply", SCOTUSblog (December 1, 2015).
  32. ^ Lyle Denniston, "States want wider immigration review, if Court takes case", SCOTUSblog (December 29, 2015).
  33. ^ Liptak, Adam (19 January 2016). "Justices to Hear State Challenge on Immigration". The New York Times. No. 20 January 2016, section A1. Retrieved 20 January 2016.
  34. ^ Palazzolo, Joe (19 January 2016). "In Immigration Case, Supreme Court Takes an Interest in 'Take Care' Clause". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 20 January 2016.
  35. ^ "United States v. Texas". Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech, n.d. Nov 19, 2016.
  36. ^ The Editorial Board of the New York Times (17 April 2016). "Immigration Politics at the Court". The New York Times. p. SR10. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
  37. ^ No. 15-674, 579 U.S. ___ (2016).
  38. ^ a b c d e f Liptak, Adam; Shear, Michael D. (24 June 2016). "SPLIT COURT STIFLES OBAMA ON IMMIGRATION: A 9-Word Ruling Erases a Shield for Millions". The New York Times. pp. A1, Column 1. Retrieved 25 June 2016.
  39. ^ "President Obama Delivers a Statement on the Supreme Court's Ruling on Immigration". YouTube. The White House. June 23, 2016. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
  40. ^ a b c Shear, Michael (May 19, 2016). "Federal Judge in Texas Demands Justice Dept. Lawyers Take Ethics Class". New York Times. New York. Retrieved May 20, 2016. In a blistering order, Judge Andrew S. Hanen of Federal District Court in Brownsville accused the Justice Department lawyers of lying to him during arguments in the case, and he barred them from appearing in his courtroom.
  41. ^ a b Palazzolo, Joe; Gershman, Jacob (May 19, 2016). "Furious Federal Judge Orders Justice Department Lawyers to Undergo Ethics Training". The Wall Street Journal. New York. Retrieved May 20, 2016. The problem, according to Judge Hanen, is the Justice Department assured him that the federal government would not begin implementing the program – which the judge apparently took to mean any part of it – before February 2015, giving him time to weigh the legal issues. He also said the Justice Department misled him about how many three-year extensions were granted.
  42. ^ Gerstein, Josh (18 November 2016). "Citing Trump win, feds move to put immigration suit on ice". Politico. Retrieved 19 November 2016.
  43. ^ "Rescission of Memorandum Providing for Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents ('DAPA')". United States Department of Homeland Security. 15 June 2017. Retrieved 18 June 2017.
  44. ^ Shear, Michael D.; Yee, Vivian (17 June 2017). "'Dreamers' to Stay in U.S. for Now, but Long-Term Fate Is Unclear". The New York Times. p. A17. Retrieved 18 June 2017.
  45. ^ Kopan, Tal (September 6, 2017). "Trump ends DACA but gives Congress window to save it". CNN. Retrieved October 14, 2019.

External links

  • Text of United States v. Texas, 579 U.S. ___ (2016) is available from: Justia  Oyez (oral argument audio)  Supreme Court (slip opinion) 
  • Coverage on SCOTUSblog
  • "President Obama is Taking Action on Immigration". The White House.

August 23, 2023
united, states, texas, 2016, united, states, texas, 2016, united, states, supreme, court, case, regarding, constitutionality, deferred, action, parents, americans, dapa, program, united, states, texassupreme, court, united, statesargued, april, 2016decided, ju. United States v Texas 579 U S 2016 is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans DAPA program United States v TexasSupreme Court of the United StatesArgued April 18 2016Decided June 23 2016Full case nameUnited States of America et al Petitioners v State of Texas et al Docket no 15 674Citations579 U S more 136 S Ct 2271 195 L Ed 2d 638Case historyPriorIssuing preliminary injunction 86 F Supp 3d 591 S D Tex 2015 stay denied 787 F 3d 733 5th Cir 2015 preliminary injunction affirmed 809 F 3d 134 5th Cir 2015 cert granted 136 S Ct 906 2016 HoldingThe judgment was affirmed by an equally divided court Court membershipChief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Anthony Kennedy Clarence ThomasRuth Bader Ginsburg Stephen BreyerSamuel Alito Sonia SotomayorElena KaganCase opinionPer curiamLaws appliedTake Care Clause of the U S Constitution Administrative Procedure Act United States immigration legislation from 1952 1965 1986 1990 1996 etc In a one line per curiam decision an equally divided Court affirmed the lower court injunction blocking the President s program The case was decided by an eight member bench due to the death of Justice Antonin Scalia Contents 1 Background 1 1 United States District Court 1 2 United States Court of Appeals 2 Supreme Court of the United States 3 Further developments 3 1 Sanctions on Department of Justice attorneys 3 2 Trump administration 4 References 5 External linksBackground EditOn June 27 2013 the U S Senate s Gang of Eight successfully passed its comprehensive immigration reform bill in the Senate 1 2 However the Republican controlled House did not initially act on the Senate s bill 3 4 When pressed during an interview on Univision in March 2014 to take unilateral executive action to limit deportations President Barack Obama replied until Congress passes a new law then I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do 5 On June 9 2014 House Whip Kevin McCarthy announced that House Republicans had enough votes to pass the bill 1 6 However the next day House Majority Leader Eric Cantor lost his primary election So on June 30 Speaker John Boehner announced that he would not bring the bill to a vote 1 That same day President Obama delivered remarks in the White House Rose Garden promising to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own without Congress 1 7 Over the next four months the Obama Administration went through sixty iterations of different possible executive actions 8 Finally on November 20 2014 President Obama delivered a primetime televised address to the nation announcing DAPA 9 10 The Office of Legal Counsel advised that the program was constitutional finding it was similar to President George H W Bush s 1990 Family Fairness program 11 Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson then released two memorandums directing the U S Immigration and Customs Enforcement Bureau to make aliens who lacked criminal histories the lowest priority for removal 12 and to grant deferred action to illegal immigrants who are the parents of a U S citizen or lawful permanent resident 13 The President s program when combined with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals would have delayed the deportation of slightly less than half of the 11 million undocumented aliens in the United States 14 The New York Times reported that more than 10 million people live in households with at least one potentially DAPA eligible adult and that two thirds of these adults have lived in the United States for at least 10 years 14 Over half the undocumented aliens eligible for the President s delayed deportation live in California Texas and New York 14 Two weeks later the Attorney General of Texas Greg Abbott whose was suit joined by twenty six other states sued in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas 1 Of the 3 6 million illegal aliens eligible for DAPA 2 2 million reside in states that did not join the lawsuit 14 United States District Court Edit On February 16 2015 United States District Judge Andrew S Hanen in Brownsville Texas issued a preliminary injunction against an executive action taken by President Barack Obama that would have given illegal immigrants legal status and protection and let them apply for work permits why 15 16 17 The U S government on February 23 2015 asked the Court to lift the injunction while it appealed his ruling to the 5th U S Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans 18 19 it also proposed that the Court could issue a partial stay that would allow every state except for Texas to start implementing DAPA 19 In an opinion and order published on April 7 2015 Hanen denied the Government s request to stay the preliminary injunction 20 15 He affirmed the earlier ruling that the plaintiff states had standing 20 3 7 cited statements made by President Obama regarding the applicability of the Administrative Procedure Act APA that DHS employees would suffer consequences if they failed to follow the DHS Directive further explanation needed 20 7 11 denied the DOJ request to apply for the injunction only to Texas 20 11 12 and addressed vague the issue of irreparable harm with regard to both the federal government and to the states 20 13 14 On the same day the Court issued a separate order criticizing the federal government for granting three year periods of deferred action to 108 081 individuals between the announcement of DAPA and the preliminary injunction 21 3 20 2 despite earlier statements made to the court by the Department of Justice that no action would be taken on these applications 21 2 The Court reserved the right to impose sanctions against the federal government s counsel for misrepresenting facts 21 9 United States Court of Appeals Edit The Obama Administration appealed the order for a preliminary injunction and asked the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans to stay the district court s injunction pending appeal 22 On May 26 2015 the administration s motion for a stay was denied by a divided three member motions panel over a dissent by Judge Stephen A Higginson meaning that the government could not implement DAPA until the Fifth Circuit ruled on the appeal of the injunction order itself 23 24 25 Arguments were heard on an expedited basis on July 10 2015 On November 9 2015 a three member panel of the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court s preliminary injunction over one dissent 26 27 The divided circuit court affirmed the preliminary injunction and ordered the case back to the district court for trial 28 Judge Jerry Edwin Smith joined by Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod agreed with the district court that Texas has standing because of the cost of issuing driver s licenses to aliens and that President Obama s order violated the rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act 28 The majority made a new finding that the Immigration and Nationality Act flatly does not permit deferred action 29 Judge Carolyn Dineen King dissented arguing that prosecutorial discretion makes the case non justiciable and that there had been no justification for the circuit court s delay in the ruling 29 Supreme Court of the United States EditOn November 10 2015 the Justice Department announced it would ask the Supreme Court to reverse 30 Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton attempted to prolong consideration of the case until the next October term but the Supreme Court only granted him an eight day extension to file his opposition brief 31 The Justice Department further hastened the case by waiving its right to file a reply brief 32 On January 19 2016 the Supreme Court agreed to review the case 33 The Court took the unusual step of asking for a briefing on the new constitutional question as to whether or not DAPA violates the Take Care Clause 34 Due to the subsequent death of Justice Antonin Scalia the case was decided by eight justices On April 18 2016 the Court heard ninety minutes of oral arguments from Donald B Verrilli Jr the Solicitor General of the United States an attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund as an intervenor in support of the Government Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller for the several states and a Bancroft PLLC attorney representing the United States House of Representatives as a friend of Texas 35 Commentators complained that the arguments were one of the most flagrant examples in recent memory of a naked political dispute masquerading as a legal one 36 On June 23 2016 the Supreme Court announced it had deadlocked 4 4 in a decision that read in its entirety The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court 37 38 The ruling set no precedent and simply left in place the lower court s preliminary injunction blocking the program 38 The case may reach the Supreme Court again after Judge Hanen has held a trial 38 President Obama immediately held a press conference criticizing the decision where he blamed spasms of politics around immigration and fear mongering as well as Senate Republicans for refusing to consider his nominee for the Supreme Court Merrick Garland 38 39 Former acting Solicitor General Walter Dellinger observed seldom have the hopes of so many been crushed by so few words 38 Texas Attorney General Paxton praised the result because This is a major setback to President Obama s attempts to expand executive power and a victory for those who believe in the separation of powers and the rule of law 38 Further developments EditSanctions on Department of Justice attorneys Edit While the case was awaiting a decision from the United States Supreme Court trial court judge Hanen issued a temporary hold on three year renewals of work authorization for some illegal immigrants 40 The federal government gave three year renewals of work authorization for 2 500 young illegal immigrants despite Judge Hanen s order 40 The federal government later reversed the three year extensions for those 2 500 people and attorneys for the Department of Justice said the renewals of work authorizations were made in error 40 Judge Hanen accused the attorneys of purposely misleading his court he barred them from appearing in his courtroom he demanded ethics classes for the attorneys and he ordered other sanctions for those who argued the case in his courtroom 41 Judge Hanen also ordered Attorney General Loretta Lynch to appoint someone within the department to ensure compliance with his order 41 Trump administration Edit On November 18 2016 attorneys for both parties filed a joint motion to stay proceeding until one month after President Donald Trump s inauguration 42 On June 15 2017 new Homeland Security Secretary John F Kelly signed a memo rescinding DAPA ending the matter 43 DHS s announcement clarified that the new memo does not affect Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals leading the White House to announce it had not decided if it will or will not keep that other policy 44 However on September 5 2017 the Trump Administration announced that they planned to end DACA if Congress was unable to pass it into law within six months 45 References Edit a b c d e Josh Blackman The Supreme Court 2015 Term Comment Gridlock 130 Harv L Rev 241 2016 S 744 113th Cong 2013 S 744 Border Security Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act Congress gov 27 June 2013 Retrieved 5 September 2017 Keeling Drew 2014 Immigration Reform Issues Since 2013 Migration as a travel business Shear Michael D Preston Julia 29 November 2016 Obama Pushed Fullest Extent of His Powers on Immigration Plan The New York Times p A1 Retrieved 19 November 2016 Frontline Immigration Battle PBS Television broadcast October 20 2015 Retrieved 19 November 2016 President Obama delivers remarks on border security and immigration reform from the White House Rose Garden YouTube The White House June 30 2014 Retrieved 19 November 2016 Anna Palmer Seung Min Kim amp Carrie Budoff Brown How Obama Got Here Politico November 20 2014 Adam B Cox amp Cristina M Rodriguez The President and Immigration Law Redux 125 Yale L J 104 155 2015 In an address to the nation President Obama lays out the executive action he s taking to fix our nation s broken immigration system YouTube The White House November 20 2014 Retrieved 19 November 2016 The Dep t of Homeland Sec s Auth to Prioritize Removal of Certain Aliens Unlawfully Present in the U S and to Defer Removal of Others PDF 38 Op O L C 14 Department of Justice 2014 11 19 Archived from the original on April 2 2015 Memorandum from Jeh Charles Johnson Secretary Department of Homeland Sec to Thomas S Winkowski Acting Director U S Immigration and Customs Enforcement et al Policies for the Apprehension Detention and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants Department of Homeland Security November 20 2014 Memorandum from Jeh Charles Johnson Secretary Department of Homeland Security to Leon Rodriguez Dir U S Citizenship and Immigration Services et al Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children and with Respect to Certain Individuals Who Are the Parents of U S Citizens or Permanent Residents Department of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson November 20 2014 a b c d Park Haeyoun Parlapiano Alicia 23 June 2016 Supreme Court s Decision on Immigration Case Affects Millions of Unauthorized Immigrants The New York Times Retrieved 25 June 2016 Texas v United States 86 F Supp 3d 591 S D Tex 2015 Barbash Fred February 17 2015 Federal Judge in Texas Blocks Obama Immigration Orders The Washington Post Retrieved February 24 2015 Preston Julia amp Shear Michael February 17 2015 Dealt Setback Obama Puts Off Immigrant Plan The New York Times Retrieved February 24 2015 Tatia Woldt 26 state coalition led by Texas asks judge to not lift stay in immigration lawsuit Dallas Morning News 4 March 2015 a b cmgdigital com Case 1 14 cv 00254 Document 150 Defendants Emergency Expedited Motion to Stay the Court s February 16 2015 Order Pending Appeal and Supporting Memorandum February 23 2015 a b c d e f Texas v United States No 1 14 cv 00254 S D Tex April 7 2015 a b c Texas v United States No 1 14 cv 00254 S D Tex April 7 2015 House Democrats Encourage Representatives To Keep Holding Events On Obama Immigration Actions The Huffington Post February 19 2015 Nakamura David Obama administration won t seek emergency stay from Supreme Court on immigration injunction The Washington Post May 27 2015 Kalhan Anil June 3 2015 Executive Action on Immigration and the Judicial Artifice of Lawful Presence Dorf on Law Texas v United States 787 F 3d 733 5th Cir 2015 Texas v United States 809 F 3d 134 5th Cir 2015 Shear Michael D November 9 2015 Appeals Court Deals Blow to Obama s Immigration Plans New York Times Retrieved November 9 2015 a b Lind Dara 10 November 2015 Obama s immigration executive actions are up to the Supreme Court Vox Retrieved 12 November 2015 a b Ford Matt 10 November 2015 A Ruling Against the Obama Administration on Immigration The Atlantic Retrieved 12 November 2015 Shear Michael D November 10 2015 Obama appeals immigration ruling to Supreme Court New York Times Retrieved November 10 2015 Lyle Denniston States get a bit more time for immigration reply SCOTUSblog December 1 2015 Lyle Denniston States want wider immigration review if Court takes case SCOTUSblog December 29 2015 Liptak Adam 19 January 2016 Justices to Hear State Challenge on Immigration The New York Times No 20 January 2016 section A1 Retrieved 20 January 2016 Palazzolo Joe 19 January 2016 In Immigration Case Supreme Court Takes an Interest in Take Care Clause The Wall Street Journal Retrieved 20 January 2016 United States v Texas Oyez Chicago Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech n d Nov 19 2016 The Editorial Board of the New York Times 17 April 2016 Immigration Politics at the Court The New York Times p SR10 Retrieved 19 November 2016 No 15 674 579 U S 2016 a b c d e f Liptak Adam Shear Michael D 24 June 2016 SPLIT COURT STIFLES OBAMA ON IMMIGRATION A 9 Word Ruling Erases a Shield for Millions The New York Times pp A1 Column 1 Retrieved 25 June 2016 President Obama Delivers a Statement on the Supreme Court s Ruling on Immigration YouTube The White House June 23 2016 Retrieved 19 November 2016 a b c Shear Michael May 19 2016 Federal Judge in Texas Demands Justice Dept Lawyers Take Ethics Class New York Times New York Retrieved May 20 2016 In a blistering order Judge Andrew S Hanen of Federal District Court in Brownsville accused the Justice Department lawyers of lying to him during arguments in the case and he barred them from appearing in his courtroom a b Palazzolo Joe Gershman Jacob May 19 2016 Furious Federal Judge Orders Justice Department Lawyers to Undergo Ethics Training The Wall Street Journal New York Retrieved May 20 2016 The problem according to Judge Hanen is the Justice Department assured him that the federal government would not begin implementing the program which the judge apparently took to mean any part of it before February 2015 giving him time to weigh the legal issues He also said the Justice Department misled him about how many three year extensions were granted Gerstein Josh 18 November 2016 Citing Trump win feds move to put immigration suit on ice Politico Retrieved 19 November 2016 Rescission of Memorandum Providing for Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents DAPA United States Department of Homeland Security 15 June 2017 Retrieved 18 June 2017 Shear Michael D Yee Vivian 17 June 2017 Dreamers to Stay in U S for Now but Long Term Fate Is Unclear The New York Times p A17 Retrieved 18 June 2017 Kopan Tal September 6 2017 Trump ends DACA but gives Congress window to save it CNN Retrieved October 14 2019 External links EditText of United States v Texas 579 U S 2016 is available from Justia Oyez oral argument audio Supreme Court slip opinion Coverage on SCOTUSblog President Obama is Taking Action on Immigration The White House Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title United States v Texas 2016 amp oldid 1156367229, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.