The Horn News

Proudly American, Fiercely Independent

Get in the loop!

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Privacy Policy

One moment, please:

Processing your submission

  • Home
  • Politics
  • National News
  • Money
  • International
  • Health
  • Lifestyle
  • America Unleashed

Obama’s immigrant plan heads to Supreme Court

April 18, 2016 By: Stephen Dietrich

  • Facebook
  • linkedin
  • Post

The Supreme Court is taking up an important dispute over immigration that could affect millions of people who are living in the country illegally.

The Obama administration is asking the justices in arguments Monday to allow it to put in place two programs that could shield roughly 4 million people from deportation and make them eligible to work in the United States.

Texas is leading 26 states dominated by Republicans in challenging the programs President Barack Obama announced in 2014 and that have been put on hold by lower courts.

The high court is expected to decide by late June whether the efforts can move forward in the waning months of Obama’s presidency, amid a presidential campaign that has been marked by harsh Republican rhetoric over immigration.

The programs would apply to parents whose children are citizens or are living in the country legally. Eligibility also would be expanded for the president’s 2012 effort that applies to people who were brought here illegally as children. More than 700,000 people have taken advantage of that earlier program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. The new program for parents, known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans, and the expanded program for children could reach as many as 4 million people, according to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute.

The states, joined by congressional Republicans, argue that Obama doesn’t have the power to effectively change immigration law. When he announced the measures 17 months ago, Obama said he was acting under his own authority because Congress had failed to overhaul the immigration system. The Senate had passed legislation on a bipartisan vote, but House Republicans refused to put the matter to a vote.

House Republicans told the court that Obama is claiming the power “to decree that millions of individuals may live, work and receive benefits in this country, even though federal statutes plainly prohibit them from doing so.”

The administration and immigration advocates say the immigration orders are neither unprecedented nor even unusual. Rather, they say, Obama’s programs build on past efforts by Democratic and Republican administrations to use discretion in deciding whom to deport.

The administration and its supporters said the challenged programs do not offer blanket protection, but depend on case-by-case reviews. The protection from deportation also would be temporary, for three years.

Another 16 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia said they would reap billions of dollars in additional taxes and would see other benefits, including increasing trust between immigrant communities and police, if the programs are allowed to take effect.

Both sides acknowledge that the outcome of the presidential election could determine the programs’ fates, even if the Supreme Court rules for the administration. Republican candidates have pledged to roll back Obama’s actions, and Republican candidate Donald Trump has proposed deporting the roughly 11 million people who are living in the U.S. illegally.

The Supreme Court will weigh whether Obama has authority to order the new programs under existing immigration law and the Constitution. The court also could decide that Texas and the other states don’t have the right to sue in federal court, a procedural outcome that would largely sidestep the divisive immigration issue.

Another possibility is a 4-4 tie following Justice Antonin Scalia’s death in February. That would leave the programs in limbo, almost certainly through the end of Obama’s presidency.

The Associated Press contributed to this article. 

About the Author

Stephen Dietrich

Stephen is a U.S. Army veteran with over a decade of combined experience in political commentary, economics, and news.

Comments

  1. Tugboat says

    April 18, 2016 at 9:52 am

    Well , well,……..The all inclusive, private cabal, gets to render a verdict for the masses of Satan followers. He has been working his magic for quite awhile now. Just remember folks on the fence or still lost…… Jesus Christ is waiting for you to accept his eternal gift… Eternal Life. Ok ,maybe that was over the top, but I had to tell you. I love Jesus Christ. Everything is going according to Gods plan.

  2. gail says

    April 18, 2016 at 1:52 pm

    Illegals won’t be paying taxes! That has already been proven! Tax payers will support these people till they die. We will support their kids in every way. Mass deportation needs to take place!

  3. Justin W says

    April 19, 2016 at 5:13 pm

    Maybe the bigger question should be do you want future presidents to govern by executive order? I’m going to guess President Trump would have no problem issuing executive orders. I’m going to guess the people who applaud President Obama’s governing by executive order will not be happy if a conservative president does the same thing.

    Immigration is nothing more than a passenger in this debate. The real issue is whether a president can ignore the law as established by Congress and come up with his own rules. The justices need to think long and hard about this before siding with the Obama administration. This should really be an 8-0 decision in the states’ favor.

  4. Fran says

    April 19, 2016 at 8:04 pm

    How many times did Obama state, he doesn’t have the authority, to do what he eventually did. Time and time again he by passes the Congress, making law, when as President he can only enforce laws.. If the Supreme Court, follows the letter of the law, they should find his authority to legalize – unconstitutional.
    The whole premise of our system in support of illegal immigration- who have broken the law, is considered aiding and abetting. Both parties are guilty. In fact they go so far has to establish offices and literature, letting them know, what government assistance they can available themselves to. .
    The recent Omnibus, paid out over $300, Billion in subsidies for illegal & refugees maintenance, Sort of ironic, that their was no increase in Sr, Soc, Sec. but we have
    the where with all to support foreigners.

GAM slot1

POPULAR

  • NFL Hall of Famer reels in surprising post-playing career
  • Park ranger dies in freak accident at Alaska’s Mount McKinley
  • FRIDAY FAIL! Clueless Yellowstone tourist nearly gets the horns
  • Rare zoo animal named “Donald Trump” becomes viral sensation
  • Missing nuke scientist found “skeletonized” with gunshot wound
  • Arrest warrant issued for disgruntled NFL star
  • Star NFL quarterback suddenly retires for lucrative TV gig
  • Nick Saban warns Congress of out-of-control “arms race”

GAM slot2

GAM slot3

GAM slot4

  • Sign Up Now
  • About Us
  • Social
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Advertise
  • FAQ
  • Contact Us
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
  • Join FREE

Copyright © 2026 | NewMarket Health Publishing, LLC