Court rules to protect Congress’ right to preserve jobs for those lawfully in U.S.


Court rules to protect Congress’ right to preserve jobs for those lawfully in U.S.

Here is an article from NumbersUSA that tells of a victory for America and the
American worker. Please read it and appreciate that some judges remain that
are not corrupt.

Obama now takes his case to the Supreme Court for a last try at being able
to lawfully make Five Million illegals legal enough that they can get driver’s
licenses and public support.

The Obama Administration filed an appeal to the Supreme Court 11-10-2015,
today.

NumbersUSA does a lot of good work to keep us up to date on as much as
they can concerning immigration and the protection of Americas’ rights
to work. They are a great organization to support, if you can, and to sign
up for their newsletters.

Once you are a member you are given loads of opportunities to contact
your representatives in Congress and the White House. They enable you
to send faxes on issues concerning immigration at no costs to you. They
even write examples for you to send and give you the ability to add to them
and to write your own. You can’t beat an organization like NumbersUSA.
I have been a member for at least a couple of years.

God Bless America!
Joseph D. Hollinger

Nov 10
11:45 am
YES, keep sending me Media Response Alerts
NO, stop sending me Media Response Alerts
Media Response

jeremy beck

Court rules to protect Congress’ right to preserve jobs for those lawfully in U.S.

As we continue our campaign to stop the Obama administration from urging employers to hire foreign STEM grads over Americans, the courts dealt a victory for the legal workforce yesterday.

A federal appeals court has rejected President Barack Obama’s effort to move forward with a series of executive actions he announced last year seeking to give quasi-legal status and work permits to millions of undocumented immigrants.

The court’s ruling comes just hours after Politico reported that Senator Bernie Sanders has promised “to take extensive executive action to accomplish what Congress has failed to do and to build upon President Obama’s executive orders.” Hilary Clinton made the same promise earlier this summer.

Read. Comment. Share. Discuss.

USA Today reports that a key issue in the case is whether Obama’s program is just a matter of setting enforcement priorities, or if it takes the additional steps of bestowing benefits:

In his ruling Monday night, Circuit Court Judge Jerry Smith said Obama’s program “would

allow illegal aliens to receive the benefits of lawful presence solely on account of their children’s immigration status, without complying with any of the requirements … that Congress has deliberately imposed.” He was joined by Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod.

Their ruling said the program “would

dramatically increase the number of aliens eligible for work authorization, thereby undermining Congress’s stated goal of closely guarding access to work authorization and preserving jobs for those lawfully in the country.”

Judge Carolyn Dineen King dissented, arguing that the deferred action program was an “exercise of prosecutorial discretion” beyond the reach of federal court judges. She also criticized her court for stalling well beyond its normal 60-day period of review.

Despite King’s dissent, the majority view was that the executive action was about “much more than nonenforcement”.

The Texas Tribune hits on a second important point: While the injunction would block benefits such as driver’s licenses, work permits, and social security numbers – the administration retains its ability to choose nonenforcement at its discretion:

The panel also rejected the administration’s argument that halting the program would harm the administration’s ability to prioritize its resources.

“Separately, the United States postulates that the injunction prevents DHS from effectively prioritizing illegal aliens for removal. But the injunction ‘does not enjoin or impair the Secretary’s ability to marshal his assets or deploy the resources of the DHS [or] to set priorities,'” the opinion states.

To be clear: the court injunction does NOT force the administration to deport anyone. So when Reuters and others suggest the administration can no longer “shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation,” they are misleading their readers.

The court didn’t rule against the administration’s ability to choose when to not deport someone. According to the Sacramento Bee, the court took exception to the administration taking “an action to change the law,” as President Obama himself put it:

“At its core, this case is about the (administration’s) decision to change the immigration classification of millions of illegal aliens on a class-wide basis,” Judge Jerry Smith said, joined by Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod.

Immigration law “flatly does not permit the reclassification of millions of illegal aliens as lawfully present and thereby make them newly eligible for a host of federal and state benefits, including work authorization,” the court concluded.

In non-legal speak, NPR says:

…the

Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 expressly lays out how and when an immigrant can legally remain in the country. The president, the court ruled, cannot unilaterally change that, even if Congress refuses to enact new immigration laws.

Politico notes a third key aspect of the case:

U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen’s February order blocking the actions nationwide was issued on a fairly technical ground: that the changes

to immigration procedures were so significant that the administration needed to put them out for official notice and comment before moving forward.

Avoiding

public comment has become something of a pattern for the Obama administration, which was recently forced by another court to put its proposed OPT rule change before the public. That’s the focus of our Stop Overreach campaign.

The Atlantic explains how the 26 states were able to push the case this far:

Since the Constitution grants exclusive power over immigration law to the federal government, the states’ lawsuit might seem quixotic. To circumvent this, Texas and the other states contend that by granting deferred action to an estimated five million undocumented immigrants, the Obama administration’s executive actions force the states to either provide services to them or change their state laws to avoid doing so. Texas, the only state whose standing was explicitly recognized by the court, specifically argued that the immigrants’ “lawful presence” would require the state to provide them with “state-subsidized driver’s licenses”and unemployment insurance.

The Wall Street Journal says time is running out for the Supreme Court to hear the case before Obama leaves office:

The government is working against the clock and will have to act quickly to have a chance at getting the case heard in the current term, which runs until the end of June 2016. The court, which schedules arguments in appeals from October to April each term, needs to receive the appeal and get briefs from both sides before deciding whether to accept the case. Any delay would likely push the case into the next term and past the presidential election.

The New York Times says there is still time for President Obama to win the case before his term is up, but the window is small:

If the Fifth Circuit court had waited too long to allow an appeal to the Supreme Court, Mr. Obama’s hopes of carrying out his program before he leaves office in 2017 would have all but ended. As

it stands, if the Supreme Court overturns the lower-court rulings, the administration would have only a few months to begin signing people up.

Marielena Hincapia, the executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, said that while the appeals court ruling might be seen as another defeat for her cause, “the silver lining is that this is just in the nick of time for the administration to go to the Supreme Court.”

The Obama administration appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court today.

jeremy

Moved? Update your address information.

Switched to another e-mail address? Change your e-mail address online.

Sign up for text message action alerts, and you’ll receive a text message with instructions for action only when an urgent action is needed.
Take our interests survey. Let us know what you’re interested in so we can customize actions and other information to meet your needs.
Copyright © 2015 NumbersUSA. 1400 Crystal Drive, Suite 240, Arlington, VA 22202. All Rights Reserved.
To unsubscribe from ALL e-mails, reply with the word “UNSUBSCRIBE” in the subject line or review your subscription preferences.
Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

I would like to read your comments about my posts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s