U.S. President Barack Obama pauses during a ceremony honoring the National Medal of Technology and Innovation awardees at the White House in Washington November 20, 2014. Obama briefly touched upon his planned executive amnesty action on immigration, which was announced that same night. (Photo: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)
DEVELOPING: A federal appeals court Tuesday ruled to uphold the injunction against President Obama’s executive amnesty handed down in February by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen. A three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the administration’s argument and attempt to fend off the immigration lawsuit filed by 26 states.
“The genie would be impossible to put back into the bottle,” Judge Hanen wrote, flat-out stating that he agreed with the plaintiffs’ argument that the burden from legalizing millions of people is sufficient for standing, He said the order — if allowed to take effect — would be a “virtually irreversible” action.
In a 2-1 decision, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the president could not move forward with deferred deportation and additional benefits for at least 5 million illegal, undocumented immigrants. Justices Jerry Smith and Jennifer Walker Elrod denied the stay, stating in an opinion authored by Smith that the administration is unlikely to succeed on the merits of the case. Judge Stephen Higginson dissented.
“Because the government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its appeal of the injunction, we deny the motion for stay and the request to narrow the scope of the injunction,” the judges wrote.
As PPD has previously examined, particularly in the case of immigration, the results get worse when the question is asked more plainly. We have examined and explained the data on this topic in great detail in the past, but most voters still oppose President Obama’s executive order to exempt millions of illegal immigrants from deportation. In fact, according to Rasmussen tracking, more than ever say he doesn’t have the legal authority to take such action, which is precisely the question presently making its way through federal courts.
While 59 percent say Obama does not have that legal power to issue the order, which is up from 52 percent in February and a new high to date, 43 percent of voters want their state to sue the administration. That’s still more than the 39 percent who say they are opposed, but a significant 18 percent remain undecided.
Meanwhile, President Obama could either decide to ask the entire 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the case again, or he could ask the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in. There, Justice Antonin Scalia could either decide on the stay, himself, or move the case to the entire court.
But the underlaying issue remains. The Obama administration and the executive order are now 0-4 in the federal courts. The Justice Department has also asked the 5th Circuit to reverse Hanen’s overall ruling that sided with the states. That case will argued before the court in July, and a decision could take months.
The states suing Obama over his unilateral amnesty order now includes Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
Prior to the ruling, and despite assurances by top administration officials to the contrary, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services began reallocating significant resources away from a computer system — known as the “Electronic Immigration System” — in order to send letters to all 9,000,000 green card holders urging them to naturalize prior to the 2016 election.
A newly obtained document (viewable on a previous article) written by Leon Rodriguez, the “director and co-chair of the Task Force on New Americans,” details an “integration plan that will advance our nation’s global competitiveness and ensure that the people who live in this country can fully participate in their communities.”
“The last time I checked, injunctions are not mere suggestions. They are not optional,” Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley wrote in a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson. “This disregard for the court’s action is unacceptable and disturbing, especially after Secretary Johnson’s assurances that his agency would honor the injunction.”
The most damning journalistic sin committed by the media during the era of Russia collusion…
The first ecological study finds mask mandates were not effective at slowing the spread of…
On "What Are the Odds?" Monday, Robert Barnes and Rich Baris note how big tech…
On "What Are the Odds?" Monday, Robert Barnes and Rich Baris discuss why America First…
Personal income fell $1,516.6 billion (7.1%) in February, roughly the consensus forecast, while consumer spending…
Research finds those previously infected by or vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 are not at risk of…
This website uses cookies.
View Comments
GOOD!!!!!!
Perhaps there IS hope that there are folks who understand what illegal means. It is interesting to hear the POTUS talk about no job opportunities in the cities but allow ILLEGAL folks into the country who represent a direct conflict to job opportunities for Americans.
Then numbers show how many refugees came over during the Bush administration and were not sent back, and, once again, President Obama has done more to fix this problem than President Bush did, Of course, Reagan's solution was to grant amnesty to millions of "illegals". Btw, the old lie that they're taking away jobs from Americans is pretty lame. Try harder if you do not want folks to ignore you.
Not millions.... million (1 million), from Reagan. Reagan also said it was the biggest mistake he made as president. So since a president in the past made a colossal mistake we should allow this one to make it on a bigger scale? That argument makes zero flipping sense.
What does bush have to do with this? He was awful too.
You should try harder, since all you're doing is deflecting away from the issue instead of arguing it's merits.
"What does bush have to do with this?" Plenty, since it was part of the huge mess he left behind.
Comparing and contrasting is a useful exercise, and it highlights the politics behind all of this. Bush was horrible; that's true. Using the same standard, it's impossible to say Obama is terrible since we are in such a better situation after six years of his leadership.
Better? In what regard? Its not hard to end a market crash by pumping endless money into it. Its just robbing Peter to pay Paul. Instead of going at the issues and addressing the disease he's spent trillions attacking the symptoms. We have a huge huge huge debt problem that has been exacerbated ten fold under this president.
Why else wouldn't the federal reserve raise interest rates?
This president has changed almost every measurable standard we've had in this country to show him in a positive light, but reality is that 90 million working age individuals are not working (up from 67 million) and 48 whopping percent of the populace receives some manner of government assistance and doesn't pay federal taxes.
How in your right mind can you say this is better? For the time being maybe, but for the future we're utterly unsustainable. While creating precedence for more insolvency.
When someone like me, in the middle class, makes 70k a year and 45% of my annual income from gross goes to taxes and a $900 a month healthcare premium (up from $250 a month), with kids no less; how long do you think we can keep paying for the status quo? Guess whose going to pay for that? Add in that more people than ever are going to emergency rooms and it all adds to a situation in which we can no longer keep kicking the can down the road.
The government is so inneficient that nearly 90 cents of every dollar just goes to operating costs and administrative fees. This isn't success, it's just nothing but temporary relief and a bigger problem for another day.
Bush didn't create the lending practices that caused the housing bubble to crash, Clinton did, nor did his entirely Democrat Congress do anything to blunt it's effects. They stepped aside and used it as a political football.
Just to clarify for the record, the Bush administration did have comprehensive immigration reform on the top of his second-term list of TO-DOs, despite the base's objections. However, and you can look this up, then-Sen. Barack Obama -- after pledging his support in the Oval Office to Bush, himself -- caved to Illinois unions and began introducing "poison pill amendments" to kill the bill. That's the truth, that's what happened, and everyone in D.C. knows it.
Wasn't President Bush's last item on his to-do list to get out of town before he was tarred and feathered? I'm gonna look that up.
Obama needs to understand that he is not the emperor or king of the United States of America.
Well, since a court just blocked his Executive action on virtual amnesty for over 5 million illegal aliens, I think he understands that he's not a king or an emperor.
He is the President, though, elected twice by a majority of American voters, something the right wing has rarely been able to do. Instead of ignoring the problem, as his Republican predecessors have done, President Obama has shown empathy and compassion to these refugees (a more accurate term than "illegals".) The Right Wing is so frustrated at their ability to lead; all they can do is complain, block, insult, or lie.
All of which you've said is pointless. There's a process for doing these tthings, and if Republicans won't give it to Obama because neither side can compromise on the issue; then Obama doesnt get it.
I think a lot of you people supporting this garbage are going to be very disappointed the next time a president of your less preferred political persuasion gets in office and starts rubber stamping everything he wants through; regardless of if you've voted in an entirely liberal Congress.
AH yes, it's all Buhs's fault.
Buh's?
Checks and Balances baby!
I would take a page from Republicans and block the courts budget.
Potential Candidate for President Donald Trump pledge of a giant wall, would forever stop a further illegal alien invasion?
The NumbersUSA organization
for lower immigration after weeks of work, their team is ready to display
evaluations of the 20 potential politicians who Real Clear Politics E-Media
show issues of polling at 1% or higher as a 2016 Presidential candidate for either
the Democrats or Republicans. Each measure is calculated by a grading system,
such as CHAIN MIGRATION.
http://www.NumbersUSA.com/2016
Donald Trump, as a Presidential
Candidate stated “I Would Build the Greatest Wall you have ever seen on the
Mexican Border.” Trump cannot be bought like the Hillary Clintons and other
politicians, who must be provided patron money to survive. Trump doesn’t need
‘Super Pacs’ money that wealthy donors use to bribe our politicians.
Donald Trump has the guts to stop the jobs going to China, Mexico and
other countries. He said that he believes in ‘Free Trade’ but he would charge
35% tariffs to anybody importing products into America. As
to China a
major culprit, he also said he would end the decades of this nation’s
fraudulent manipulation of their currency. Click on Donald Trumps website to
read his manifesto to return America to
its greatness at https://www.donaldjtrump.com/
It would be his obligation to lower the corporate tax, so
that companies building outside America
would return to manufacture their goods in America. By
cutting the corporate tax rate, at least 2 Trillion dollars would find it
returning to the U.S from tax havens, a benefit that would spiral hiring of the
estimated 35 million unemployed Americans and a decline in food stamps. Trump has a tough backbone and cannot be
bribed by special interests and other foreign benefactors and would reject any issue,
which this President and his minions have navigated against the American
Economy. He is not beholding to the lobbyists and can stop them from tearing
this country apart. He would stop the ultra Liberal zealots from changing our
nation, into something Americans could not recognize.
Are you in search of the uninhibited truth and not the lies or
propaganda from the GOP establishment or the Democrats? Then click on http://www.judicialwatch.org and http://www.oann.com. This is unbiased review of legal,
non-profit foundation that blatantly tells you the facts about corruption in
Federal, state and local government. In many instances this administration and
Congress ‘believe they are above the law’. Judicial Watch carefully examines
the law and will take them to court to be held accountable for unlawful
activity against this nation? The American News network, a 7/24 cable broadcast
offers world wide news, and not the prejudiced, partisan news that has strong
commitment to either Democrats, liberal or even the Republican elitists.
Very
early as yet but we should be forewarned of non-citizens voting for Hillary
Clinton in our poorly regulated voting system.