Immigration Policy: Cert. Granted in United States v. Texas

  sctbldg On Tuesday, January 19th, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in United States v. Texas, Docket # 15-674.

In November of 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a motion panel’s decision to affirm the preliminary injunction granted to the Texas Attorney General by the Texas Southern District Court in Brownsville.

According to a NYT article, twenty-six states, including South Carolina, joined with the Texas Attorney General to challenge President Obama’s DAPA, Deferred Action for Parents of American and Lawful Permanent Residents, program.

President Obama introduced DAPA on November 20, 2014 to expand DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) after being unable to successfully move immigration legislation, known as the DREAM Act,  through Congress.

On November 20, 2014, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, sent a memo to the directors of U.S. Citizens & Immigration Services, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, advising these departments to exercise prosecutorial discretion when encountering illegal immigrants who are parents of citizens or lawful permanent residents. This memo expanded and updated the 2012 memo issued by Janet Napolitano, then Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

DAPA would permit five million illegal immigrants who are parents of citizens or lawful permanent residents to avoid deportation and acquire work permits.

The Attorney General and the coalition of 26 states argued that DAPA and DACA violated the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 551 (2012 & Supps.) and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution, Article II, Section 3.   The courts of the Southern District of Texas and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agreed, issuing and upholding an injunction to prevent implementation of the program.

The United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the case today, ordering the parties to not only brief and argue the questions raised in their petitions but to also brief and argue the following issue raised by the Court:  “whether the Guidance violates the Take Care Clause of the Constitution, article II, section 3?”

 

 

About Lisa Smith-Butler

Lisa is the Associate Dean for Information Services at the Charleston School of Law, Sol Blatt Jr. Law Library. She teaches Advanced Legal Research & Children & the Law.
This entry was posted in Legal instruction, Library Resources, Library service and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s