Dealt Setback, Obama Puts Off Immigrant Plan
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR and JULIA PRESTON
FEB. 17, 2015 - New York Times
WASHINGTON — One day before
hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants were to begin applying for work
permits and legal protection, administration officials on Tuesday postponed
President Obamafs sweeping executive actions on immigration indefinitely, saying
they had no choice but to comply with a federal judgefs last-minute order
halting the programs.
The judgefs ruling was a
significant setback for the president, who had asserted broad authority to take
executive actions in the face of congressional Republicansf refusal to overhaul
the immigration system. White House officials have defended the presidentfs
actions as legal and proper even as his adversaries in Congress and the states
have accused him of vastly exceeding the powers of his office.
In a decision late Monday, Judge
Andrew S. Hanen, of Federal District Court for the Southern District of Texas,
in Brownsville, ruled in favor of Texas and 25 other states that had challenged
Mr. Obamafs immigration actions. The judge said that the administrationfs
programs would impose major burdens on states, unleashing illegal immigration
and straining state budgets, and that the administration had not followed
required procedures for changing federal rules.
Mr. Obama vowed Tuesday to appeal
the court ruling and expressed confidence that he would prevail in the legal
battle to defend his signature domestic policy achievement. gThe law is on our
side, and history is on our side,h he declared.
White House officials said the
government would continue preparing to put Mr. Obamafs executive actions into
effect but would not begin accepting applications from undocumented workers
until the legal case was settled. That could take months. In the meantime, the
president urged Republican lawmakers to return to negotiations on a broader
overhaul of immigration laws.
gWe should not be tearing some mom
away from her child when the child has been born here and that mom has been
living here the last 10 years minding her own business and being an important
part of the community,h he said.
White House officials said the
Justice Department was reviewing whether to ask an appeals court to block Judge
Hanenfs ruling and allow the executive actions to proceed. But for now, the
judgefs ruling could be a crushing disappointment to members of the immigrant
community, who have spent much of the last two years pressuring Mr. Obama to act
decisively to prevent deportations that separate immigrant families, including
many with children or spouses who are living in the United States legally.
In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott, a
Republican who had filed the lawsuit in his former position as the statefs
attorney general, hailed the ruling Tuesday as a victory for the rule of law.
gPresident Obama abdicated his responsibility to uphold the United States
Constitution when he attempted to circumvent the laws passed by Congress via
executive fiat,h Mr. Abbott said, gand Judge Hanenfs decision rightly stops the
presidentfs overreach in its tracks.h
Mr. Obama announced his executive
actions on Nov. 20, shortly after Republicans won control of Congress. His plan
to shield as many as five million undocumented immigrants from deportation
immediately drew harsh attacks from conservatives and prompted legal
challenges.
Under the judgefs ruling, the
expansion of an existing program that was to begin on Wednesday will be
postponed; for now, as many as 270,000 immigrants who came to the United States
as children cannot apply for it. White House officials also said Tuesday that
they were delaying a second program that would benefit about four million
undocumented immigrants with children who are American citizens or legal
residents. That program was scheduled to start in May.
Republicans in Congress seized on
the judgefs ruling Tuesday to bolster their argument that funding for the
Department of Homeland Security should not be approved without measures to block
the presidentfs actions.
gThe presidentfs
extra-constitutional actions were rooted in political expediency and were devoid
of a serious legal underpinning,h said Representative Trey Gowdy, Republican of
South Carolina and chairman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration.
gThis is not and never was about immigration law.h
But White House officials and some
legal scholars noted that another federal judge had dismissed a different
challenge to the presidentfs executive actions, and they predicted that Judge
Hanenfs decision was likely to be suspended by the appeals court.
gFederal supremacy with respect to
immigration matters makes the states a kind of interloper in disputes between
the president and Congress,h said Laurence H. Tribe, a professor of
constitutional law at Harvard. gThey donft have any right of their own.h
Immigrant advocates assailed Judge
Hanenfs ruling, saying he had failed to consider the benefits to national
security and the economy of having millions of unauthorized immigrants begin
taking background checks and paying taxes. Activists said they would continue to
prepare immigrants to file applications, on the assumption that the programs
would soon be up and running.
gDetractors of these programs may
try to paint this as a fight with the president, but make no mistake: Attempts
to dismantle these programs are attacks on American families,h said Janet
Murguía, president of NCLR, also known as the National Council of La Raza, the
countryfs largest Latino organization.
In his 123-page opinion, Judge
Hanen said administration officials had provided gperplexingh misrepresentations
of the scope and impact of the presidentfs actions. Calling the new programs ga
substantive change to immigration policy,h he said they were, gin effect, a new
law.h
As part of the presidentfs
announcements on Nov. 20, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security,
Jeh Johnson, also established new priorities, instructing enforcement agents to
concentrate on deporting terrorists, and gang members, as well as migrants
caught crossing the border illegally.
The judge rejected the argument
that those changes were a proper exercise of prosecutorial discretion, ruling
that the administration had engaged in ga complete abdicationh of enforcement.
The Department of Homeland Security, he wrote, cannot genact a program whereby
it not only ignores the dictates of Congress, but actively acts to thwart
them.h
White House officials said the
judgefs order did not prevent Homeland Security officials from exercising that
discretion, and they said the department would continue to focus its enforcement
efforts on dangerous immigrants.
The ruling was not unexpected. In
August, Judge Hanen accused the Obama administration of adopting a deportation
policy that was gan open invitation to the most dangerous criminals in
society.h
Since the lawsuit was filed on
Dec. 3, the stark divisions over Mr. Obamafs sweeping actions have played out in
filings in the case. Three senators and 65 House members, all Republicans,
signed a legal brief opposing the presidentfs actions.
On the other side, a dozen states
and the District of Columbia supported Mr. Obama.
Across the country, many
immigrants were ready to fill out their applications when the immigration agency
posted the forms for the first time on its website Wednesday.
Dulce Valencia, 19, who was born
in Mexico but has lived almost all of her life in the United States, said she
was disappointed that she would have to wait.
gI felt like my world crashed a
little bit,h she said.