US-born Edith Valdez attends an immigration reform rally with her undocumented mother Margarita Valdez, at the Atlanta City Detention Centre. The rally was part of a national ‘Chant Down the Walls’ day of protest, according to organisers.
Reuters/AFP
|
|
The morning after President Barack Obama announced his sweeping action to overhaul the US immigration system, conservative groups and states were already pulling together legal strategies to dismantle the plan.
Opponents said there will likely be a three-pronged legal approach to stymie Obama’s moves: Congress could sue the president for constitutional overreach, states could file lawsuits arguing the action strains local finances, or individuals could try to prove they’ve been harmed by the order.
Just hours after the speech, an Arizona sheriff filed suit arguing the reform is unconstitutional.
“There is going to be massive litigation all over the place because there is tremendous legal confusion about what the administration is doing and what the states’ obligations will be,” said Dan Stein from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which calls for restrictions on immigration.
While law scholars say the president is on strong legal footing, a flurry of lawsuits will cause headaches for the Obama administration in its final two years and may stir public opinion against a policy meant to be one of his signature triumphs.
Obama’s healthcare plan, another major political victory for the President, has also been mired in legal challenges with opponents taking suits all the way to the Supreme Court.
Just yesterday, Republicans in the US House of Representatives filed a long-anticipated lawsuit challenging Obamacare (
States are already lining up to sue over Obama’s immigration action, under which he plans to grant temporary legal status to some 4.4mn undocumented immigrants who are parents of US citizens and legal permanent residents.
“With this action the president has chosen to deliberately sabotage any chance of enacting bipartisan reforms he claims to seek,” House Speaker John Boehner declared yesterday. “We are working with our members and looking at the options that are available to us. But I will say to you: the House will in fact act.”
In a prime-time address, Obama said nearly a dozen commanders-in-chief before him have acted unilaterally over the past half century on some facet of immigration reform.
“There are actions I have the legal authority to take as president – the same kinds of actions taken by Democratic and Republican presidents before me – that will help make our immigration system more fair and more just,” Obama said in his speech.
Republicans were not buying it.
“The constitution does not grant the president the power to act as a one-man legislature by appealing to ‘tradition’,” Republican National Committee (RNC) chairman Reince Priebus fumed on Twitter.
The RNC also urged opponents of the reform to contribute money to the party to help fight the order.
Obama was quick to stress that the sweeping order “does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive”.
“Only Congress can do that,” he added. “All we’re saying is we’re not going to deport you.”
Republicans are not buying it.
Lawmakers should push back against Obama’s “illegal power-grab”, said Senator John McCain, a Republican who helped craft immigration legislation that passed the Senate but died in the Republican House.
But he has warned against provoking another shutdown like the one in 2013 that was blamed on Republicans.
“Congress must be creative in using all the tools in our toolbox – including mounting a legal challenge – to oppose the president’s action,” he said.
Conservative Senator Ted Cruz urged fellow senators to block Obama’s choices for ambassadorial and administration posts, as well as judgeships.
Republican governors Scott Walker of Wisconsin, Rick Perry of Texas and Pat McCrory of North Carolina have all voiced support for taking legal action without giving further details.
Oklahoma Attorney-General Scott Pruitt also announced his intention to sue.
Still, making a legal case will be an uphill battle.
Presidents historically have had wide discretion to act alone on immigration and under a concept known as “prosecutorial discretion”, can decide to not enforce every violation of federal law when resources are limited.
In a 33-page legal memo, the Department of Justice said the action falls within the bounds of the constitution and that Congress has supported favourable treatment of law-abiding immigrants with deep US ties.
