26.03.2016 Views

GSN March 2016 Digital Edition

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Border Security/Immigration<br />

What’s next in the Supreme Court Case<br />

on expanded DACA and DAPA?<br />

By Mellissa Crow<br />

20, <strong>2016</strong> – This week, the<br />

Supreme Court announced it would<br />

<br />

Texas. The highest court will now<br />

<br />

deferred action initiatives announced<br />

in November 2014,<br />

known as expanded DACA and<br />

cise<br />

of executive discretion. The<br />

Supreme Court’s decision could<br />

clear the way for the initiatives<br />

to go forward as early as June of<br />

<strong>2016</strong>. If that happens, expanded<br />

vide<br />

temporary relief from deportation<br />

to as many as five million<br />

people. It’s important to note that<br />

the current, active DACA program<br />

that began in 2012, which now has<br />

more than half a million people enrolled,<br />

is not being challenged in<br />

this lawsuit.<br />

Some court watchers were surprised<br />

to see the court direct both<br />

dent’s<br />

actions violated the “Take<br />

Care” Clause of the Constitution,<br />

<br />

“take Care that the Laws be faithfully<br />

executed.” Neither the Texas district<br />

court nor the Fifth Circuit Court of<br />

Appeals addressed this legal claim;<br />

instead, the lower courts based their<br />

decisions on the government’s alleged<br />

failure to comply with certain<br />

technical requirements under<br />

<br />

The Court’s request for additional<br />

briefing on this issue suggests that it<br />

wants to resolve all the issues in the<br />

case, rather than leaving a loophole<br />

that could be the basis for a future<br />

decision by the district court, which<br />

could further delay the implementa-<br />

<br />

However, the Court may not end<br />

up reaching the merits of this case<br />

at all and may instead dismiss the<br />

44<br />

case for lack of standing, or legal capacity<br />

to bring the case. This is the<br />

best case scenario. Texas and the 25<br />

other plaintiff states are arguing that<br />

they have standing because additional<br />

costs Texas might incur to issue<br />

drivers’ licenses to beneficiaries<br />

of the deferred action programs<br />

give them enough of a stake in<br />

the case to challenge federal immigration<br />

policy. If the Court<br />

<br />

would mean that states have an<br />

unprecedented role in an area<br />

that has always been an exclusively<br />

federal domain.<br />

Oral arguments in the case<br />

will likely be scheduled for April<br />

<strong>2016</strong>. The Court will issue a decision<br />

before its current term ends in<br />

June <strong>2016</strong>. For the sake of the immigrant<br />

families whose lives are riding<br />

on this decision, let’s hope that the<br />

<br />

<br />

him dating back to Eisenhower, has<br />

the authority to take executive action<br />

on immigration.<br />

Photo Courtesy of Photo Phiend.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!