House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., issued a statement today in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to take up the executive amnesty case expressing confidence that Justices will block implementation of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) and extended Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) programs.
The statement reads:
“President Obama stated 22 times that he does not have the authority to change immigration laws on his own yet he did so anyway. President Obama’s decision to ignore the limits placed on his power and act unilaterally to rewrite our nation’s immigration laws threatens the separation of powers and its checks and balances. So far, the federal courts have prevented President Obama’s executive actions from being implemented and I am hopeful that the Supreme Court will do the same. Such lawlessness must be stopped so that we protect the Constitution and the intent of the Founding Fathers that the legislative branch, which reflects the will of and is accountable to the American people, makes the laws, not the President.”
Chairman Goodlatte and others submitted an amicus brief to the district court that initially heard the executive amnesty case (Texas v. United States), and another amicus brief when Judge Andrew Hanen’s injunction was appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law & Justice, noted "President Obama is not a king, and impatient presidents don't get to change the law. This executive overreach is both unlawful and unconstitutional." Sekulow sees the Court’s adding of the Take Care Clause as "a good omen.” He said, “it helps those of us that are concerned that the president overreached here.”
The Justice Department had asked the justices to take up the case, in part, based on the issue of whether states have legal standing to challenge DAPA and extended DACA. But Stephen Legomsky, a former chief counsel at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, notes ”If it were clear that there were five justices to rule for the [federal] government on standing, they would probably not go to the constitutional issue.”
Rosemary Jenks, Director of Government Relations for NumbersUSA also issued the following statement.
"We certainly hope the Supreme Court will carefully examine the detailed rulings of the District and Circuit Courts and come down on the side of the Constitution, as they did. There is absolutely no question after more than 200 years of jurisprudence that Congress, not the Executive Branch, has plenary power over immigration law."
