As cities are overwhelmed by this administration’s open-border policies, which see millions of illegal immigrants invading the country, we have a little bit of good news on the legal front.
On Wednesday, a federal judge ruled that the amended version of a government policy, which aims to avoid the deportation of numerous immigrants brought to the United States as children, is illegal. However, the judge did not mandate an immediate termination of the program.
U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen concurred with the plaintiffs, consisting of Texas and eight additional states, who filed a lawsuit seeking to halt the implementation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative. It was anticipated that the judge’s decision would be appealed to the United States Supreme Court, so presenting the program’s future to the top court for the third occasion.
In his 40-page opinion, Hanen underlined his worries regarding the legitimacy of the program, also acknowledging “While sympathetic to the predicament of DACA recipients and their families, this Court has expressed its concerns about the legality of the program for some time,” Hanen wrote in his 40-page ruling. “The solution for these deficiencies lies with the legislature, not the executive or judicial branches. Congress, for any number of reasons, has decided not to pass DACA-like legislation … The Executive Branch cannot usurp the power bestowed on Congress by the Constitution — even to fill a void.”
The order issued by Hanen prolonged the existing injunction against DACA, which prohibited the government from granting approval to new applications. However, it maintained the program’s continuity for current users while the legal review is still in progress.
Additionally, Hanen refused the states’ desire to mandate the termination of the program over a two-year timeframe. According to Hanen, his decision does not mandate any actions by the federal government regarding DACA recipients, commonly referred to as “Dreamers.”
According to Thomas Saenz, the president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), which is providing legal representation for those who have been granted DACA in the lawsuit, the final determination regarding the legality of DACA and the burden of proof on Texas to demonstrate harm caused by the program will rest with higher judicial bodies, which includes the Supreme Court.
“Judge Hanen has consistently erred in resolving both of these issues, and today’s ruling is more of the same flawed analysis. We look forward to continuing to defend the lawful and much-needed DACA program on review in higher courts,” Saenz accused.
The verdict made by the judge was subject to criticism from the open-border Biden administration, of course.
In a statement released on Wednesday evening, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre expressed “We are deeply disappointed in today’s DACA ruling from the District Court in Southern Texas… As we have long maintained, we disagree with the District Court’s conclusion that DACA is unlawful, and will continue to defend this critical policy from legal challenges. While we do so, consistent with the court’s order, DHS will continue to process renewals for current DACA recipients and DHS (the Department of Homeland Security) may continue to accept DACA applications.”
The states have contended that the Obama administration lacked the requisite authority to establish the program in 2012, as it purportedly circumvented the legislative branch.
In the year 2021, Hanen rendered a declaration stating that the program was deemed illegal, since it had failed to undergo the necessary public notice and comment periods mandated by the federal Administrative Procedures Act.
The Biden administration endeavored to address Hanen’s apprehensions by implementing a revised iteration of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which became effective in October 2022. This revised version of DACA underwent public scrutiny and solicited feedback as part of a formal procedure for rule-making.
However, Hanen, who was designated by former President George W. Bush in 2002, determined that the revised iteration of DACA remained unlawful due to its substantial similarity to the original version initiated by the Obama administration, as per the Biden administration’s modifications. Hanen has previously asserted that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program was in violation of the constitution.
Furthermore, it should be noted that Hanen had already made a ruling affirming that the states have the legal right to initiate their action, as they had suffered adverse effects as a result of the program.
The states assert that they experience significant financial burdens, amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars, in relation to healthcare, education, and various other expenses as a consequence of permitting immigrants to reside within the country without legal authorization. The states involved in the lawsuit are Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas, and Mississippi.
The proponents of the program, including the federal government, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the state of New Jersey, contended that the states did not provide substantiated proof linking the expenses they claim to have borne with recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. It was further contended by the authors that the Department of Homeland Security has been bestowed with the requisite legislative jurisdiction by Congress to establish policies pertaining to immigration enforcement.
The post US Supreme Court Just Gave Flood Of Illegals Bad News appeared first on The Republic Brief.