After months of anticipation, the Supreme Court of the United States finally issued its decision on President Obama's controversial plan to shield millions of non-citizens from deportation. "The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court," the ruling reads, affirming the lower court's ruling that Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA, would unfairly infringe on the solvency of Texas and other co-signing states.
As The New York Times reports, the decision not only is a statement on what some consider a questionable expansion of executive power and another example of deadlocked partisan politics, it is also a crushing disappointment for the millions of U.S. residents that the Obama administration hoped to protect and legitimize with a new status called "lawful presence."
"This is personal," said executive vice president of the Service Employees International Union Rocio Saenz. "We will remain at the front lines, committed to defending the immigration initiatives and paving the path to lasting immigration reform."
President Obama, while disappointed, remained hopeful that it was only a matter of time before immigration reform comes to the country. "Congress is not going to be able to ignore America forever," he said. "It’s not a matter of if; it’s a matter of when. We get these spasms of politics around immigration and fear-mongering, and then our traditions and our history and our better impulses kick in."
Case Background
When President Obama announced DAPA in late 2014, it was met with resistance from many states. Texas was the first to act, filing a lawsuit against the federal government, claiming that implementing DAPA in Texas would be too much of a financial burden, especially due to its issuing of driver's licenses. Twenty-three other states joined Texas' lawsuit.
The eight-justice Supreme Court agreed to hear United States v. Texas, No. 15-674, earlier this year. While many knew that a 4-4 tie was possible, there was hope that Chief Justice Roberts would join the court's liberal branch in the decision. The frustration of the tie is compounded by Congress Republicans' refusal to vet President Obama's justice nominee Judge Merrick B. Garland, who would have replaced Justice Antonin Scalia, bringing the court back to its full, nine-justice capacity.
If you, your family, or your business is currently facing an immigration matter, the dedicated team at Berry Appleman & Leiden LLP is ready to hear from you. Our skilled and compassionate team of Lake Charles immigration lawyers is ready to assess your options and ensure swift and secure legal solutions are capably pursued on your behalf.
Don't face this uncertain time without a legal advocate by your side. Call our offices today.