Civil and Human Rights

Obama administration asks 9-member SCOTUS to rehear immigration lawsuit

Page A4

By Aaron Nelsen

The Justice Department on Monday filed a petition asking that the full nine-member U.S. Supreme Court rehear the blockbuster lawsuit against President Barack Obama’s plan on immigration.

 

Last month, the high court deadlocked in a 4-4 tie, leaving in place an appeals court ruling that blocked the president’s policy on immigration that would grant more than 4 million immigrants deportation reprieves and allow them to work in the country.

 

Justice Antonin Scalia’s death earlier this year left the court with only eight justices.

 

Though it is rare for the Supreme Court to grant a rehearing, Acting Solicitor General Ian Gershengorn argued that because the same thorny issues in the immigration case could arise again there is “a strong need for definitive resolution” by the high court.

 

“Unless the Court resolves this case in a precedential manner, a matter of ‘great national importance’ involving an ‘unprecedented and momentous’ injunction barring implementation of the Guidance will have been effectively resolved for the country as a whole by a court of appeals that has divided twice, with two judges voting for petitioners and two for respondent States,” Gershengorn wrote.

 

In November 2014, Obama announced the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents program to shield millions of undocumented adults from deportation. Also under Obama’s initiative, an existing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, which was implemented in 2012, would be expanded.

 

The Texas-led challenge, joined by 25 other states, asserts that Obama overstepped his authority in launching the deferred action for parents program and in expanding the children’s program. Texas has argued the program would force the state to spend millions on schools, health care and law enforcement.

 

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ruled in February 2015 that the administration had violated the Administrative Procedure Act by circumventing public hearings in the federal rule-making process when it announced its immigration policy. The decision was upheld by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last in November, which suggested that Obama had also exceeded his authority by granting benefits to immigrants.

 

“If the court doesn’t designate for rehearing, when there’s nine justices there will be new constraints placed on the executive, and an important national program blocked without the Supreme Court weighing in and declaring what the law is,” said Elizabeth Wydra, president of the liberal Constitutional Accountability Center.

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court decision keeps the door open to accountability for police officers who make false charges

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Chiaverini v. City...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Civil and Human Rights
June 11, 2024

The People Who Dismantled Affirmative Action Have a New Strategy to Crush Racial Justice

Slate
Last summer, in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority struck...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
April 12, 2024

TV (Gray TV): CAC’s Frazelle Joins Gray TV to Discuss Fourth Amendment Case at Supreme Court

Gray TV Washington News Bureau
Civil and Human Rights
April 22, 2024

RELEASE: Justices grapple with line-drawing but resist overturning important precedent in Eighth Amendment homelessness case

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in City of...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Civil and Human Rights
April 19, 2024

Will the Supreme Court Uphold the 14th Amendment and Block an Oregon Law Criminalizing Homelessness?

Nearly 38 million Americans live in poverty. In some areas and among some populations, entrenched economic...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
April 18, 2024

DEI critics were hoping that the Supreme Court’s Muldrow decision would undermine corporate diversity programs. It does no such thing

Fortune
The Supreme Court just delivered a big win for workers and workplace equality–but conservatives are...