An illegal alien eligible for Pres. Obama's DAPA executive amnesty has filed a lawsuit challenging the scope of Judge Andrew Hanen’s injunction, preventing the program's rollout. The lawsuit claims that since the Supreme Court did not reach a decision on the case no national precedent was set and that the DAPA injunction should only apply to the 26 states involved in the original DAPA lawsuit.
The lawsuit is being brought by Batalla Vidal, an illegal alien whose three-year authorization was revoked when Judge Hanen ordered the national injunction against Pres. Obama’s executive amnesty. The injunction was upheld by the 5th Circuit Court and went to the Supreme Court which tied 4-4 in their ruling, deferring to the 5th Circuit Court's decision and upholding the injunction.
However, Vidal claims that the 5th Circuit Court does not have the authority to impose a nationwide injunction and that other circuit courts should not bound by the ruling.
“[The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] erred in revoking Mr. Batalla Vidal’s employment authorization based on an overly broad injunction entered by a court in Texas that lacked jurisdiction to reach New York residents,” the lawsuit said.
This lawsuit could determine if DAPA recipients outside of the 5th Circuit Court’s jurisdiction could still qualify for the program. DAPA would grant illegal aliens access to work permits and social security cards, which would qualify them for other state and federal benefits including welfare, essentially granting them legal status.
Read more on this story at Talking Points Memo.
