Rallies mark one year since Obama’s deportation-relief proposal

20 Nov 2015 | Author: | No comments yet »

Obama Administration Asks Supreme Court to Reinstate Immigration Policy.

Immigrant advocacy groups rallied Friday outside the Supreme Court, calling on the justices to rule in favor of President Obama’s stalled deportation-relief proposal and threatening to hold accountable the Republican governors who so far have blocked it. The rally, and similar gatherings across the country, marked the first anniversary of Obama’s announcement that he would take executive action to defer deportations for qualified parents of U.S.-born children and for certain younger undocumented immigrants. Verrilli Jr. urged the court to take prompt action to reverse an “unprecedented and momentous” appeals court ruling last week that blocked President Obama’s plan to let more than four million undocumented immigrants legally live and work in the United States. “If left undisturbed,” Mr. The request for Supreme Court review is a major development in the Department of Justice’s drive to save Obama’s immigration plan and see the programs enacted before he leaves office.

The programs, which could benefit as many as 5 million people, have been roundly criticized by Republican presidential contenders who oppose any path to legal residency for those who came here illegally. Verrilli wrote, “that ruling will allow states to frustrate the federal government’s enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws.” The case, United States v. The government moved unusually quickly, filing its appeal just a week after a federal appeals court agreed with Texas and 25 other states opposed to the plan. Otherwise the case would have to wait to be heard until October 2016, at the earliest, which would mean a decision likely wouldn’t come until after Mr. Neither program has been implemented because of the legal challenge filed by the governors, who said Obama was overstepping his authority and unduly burdening states.

Obama leaves office and a new president has a chance to undo his moves. “Appealing to defend the expansion of deferred action is the least the Administration can do on immigration,” said Marisa Franco, director of the #Not1More Campaign that wants to halt deportations. “The Department of Justice should be investigating the civil rights crisis at DHS that’s unfolding with no one watching. Obama that allowed parents of citizens or lawful permanent residents to apply for a program sparing them from deportation and allowing them to work. “Without work authorization,” Mr. The program applies to people who have been in the country since 2010 and have a child who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident, as well as people brought to the U.S. as children. ICE’s abuses constitute a fire that only the DOJ can put out.” The amnesty, known officially as Deferred Action for Parental Accountability or DAPA, was the marquee part of a series of executive actions Mr. The administration contends that, as in other law-enforcement matters, it has discretion to prioritize some deportations over others, and that the program would allow federal agencies to focus their efforts on aliens more likely to threaten public safety.

They would be eligible for legal status that would allow them to get full drivers licenses, work permits and other benefits not available to undocumented immigrants. To mark it, immigrant and Latino groups planned to vent their frustration with the appeals court’s ruling in marches and rallies at more than two dozen places around the country, including Phoenix; Raleigh, N.C.; and Miami.

Under DAPA, more than 4 million illegal immigrants were to have been granted a three-year stay of deportation and a work permit, which entitled them to Social Security numbers, driver’s licenses and potentially other benefits — a quasi-legal status. Texas maintains the administration’s plan places burdens on it, for example, by forcing it to issue drivers licenses to aliens who would have a temporary reprieve. And if the justices rule in Obama’s favor — as administration officials and legal experts have said time and time again that they would — then there would be a very quick turnaround for the U.S. to begin accepting applications before the end of the president’s term.

The judge said DHS should have followed the “notice and comment” process used for most regulations, in which an agency proposes a rule, the public and interested parties can file their opinions and recommendations regarding the proposal, and the agency then issues a final rule. Obama insists he’s only expanding on the types of policies previous presidents have overseen — though his administration admits the size of his program is unprecedented. Judge Andrew Hanen, a staunch and highly vocal opponent to Obama’s philosophy on immigration policy, placed a preliminary injunction on the executive actions and zinged the administration on minor procedural rules for not allotting sufficient time for public comment. Smith, writing for the majority, said the states had standing to challenge the program, citing a 2007 Supreme Court decision that said Massachusetts and other states were entitled to sue the Environmental Protection Agency over its refusal to regulate motor vehicle emissions contributing to climate change.

The administration’s efforts to appeal the injunction were blocked by the Fifth Circuit Court, leaving millions of undocumented families in legal limbo for a year now. He found that notice and comment were required because the program was categorical notwithstanding the administration’s assertion that it required case-by-case determinations.

In dissent, Judge Carolyn Dineen King said the majority’s decision to reach and rule on that issue was at odds with “prudence and judicial economy.” “It bars,” Mr.

Our partners
Follow us
Contact us
Our contacts

About this site