Tags: Barack Obama | Donald Trump | Immigration | Supreme Court | accord | climate | dapa

High Court Needs to Settle Obama's Invalid DACA Order

us supreme court building in washington dc at sunset

The Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., at sunset. (Richard Gunion/Dreamstime)

By
Tuesday, 21 May 2019 01:44 PM Current | Bio | Archive

Last week, a second federal circuit court remarkably voided President Trump’s executive order aimed at reversing a blatantly unconstitutional previous executive order by former President Obama granting amnesty to younger illegal immigrants under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

How do we know it's illegal?

Well, let’s start with the fact that Obama himself admitted on 20 separate occasions that he had no power to grant such amnesty.

His exact words were, "I am not king. I can't do these things just by myself."

In later remarks, he confirmed, "With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that's just not the case."

Months later he went even further, stating that he couldn’t "just bypass Congress and change the (immigration) law myself.  . . .  That's not how a democracy works."

In 2015, the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals blocked Obama from unilaterally implementing his Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) Act, which would have allowed Obama’s reinterpretation of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) to stand.

In striking down the executive order, the court noted that allowing it to stand would "grant lawful presence and work authorization to any illegal alien in the United States — an untenable position in light of the INA’s intricate system of immigration classifications and employment eligibility."

The court added, "The INA 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."

Thus, one must extrapolate that if it was illegal for Obama to unilaterally grant amnesty to adult illegal aliens, it was equally as unconstitutional to unilaterally grant such amnesty to younger illegal aliens, while adding in the bonus of being allowed to procure working papers.

Both the Fourth and Ninth Circuits have now ruled that the Trump executive order to officially wipe clean the illegal Obama DACA decree fails because the president’s lawyers did not explain a rationale for reversal, thereby making the Trump order arbitrary and capricious.

This position defies logic. Does a learned judge really need an attorney to spell out to him or her that a president does not have the unilateral authority to overturn an act of congress?

Moreover, as the Fifth Circuit noted in the DAPA decision, the immigrants’ lawful presence would require the states to provide them numerous taxpayer subsidized benefits.

But, let’s for the moment assume that Obama actually possessed the authority to execute this order.

Without congressional approval, said order would have no more a lasting impact than did Obama’s unilateral decisions to attempt to bind the United States into the brutally irresponsible Iranian nuclear deal or the Paris Climate Accord.

In both cases the newly minted incoming president had the power to issue an executive order voiding his predecessor’s actions that were not codified by Congress.

It is clearly apparent what is happening here — activist judges are imposing their political philosophy into the equation and/or are fearful of making the correct decision, which they know would have a dramatic ripple effect throughout the nation.

But that’s why they get the big bucks.

They shouldn’t be imposing their own political agendas, nor hiding behind the fact that the tough decision will ultimately be made by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, in the interim, billions have been expended by taxpayers on the undocumented population and the magnet that attracts hundreds of thousands of others to cross illegally has remained intact.

This is yet another reason why it is essential that the Supreme Court inject itself via an expedited review of this issue to settle the matter once and for all.

Steve Levy, former New York state assemblyman, Suffolk County executive, and candidate for governor, is now a distinguished political pundit. Levy's commentary has been published in such media outlets as Washington Times, Washington Examiner, New York Post, Albany Times, Long Island Business News, and City & State Magazine. He hosted “The Steve Levy Radio Show" on Long Island News Radio, and is a frequent guest on high profile television and radio outlets. Few on the political scene possess Levy’s diverse background. He’s been both a legislator and executive, and served on both the state and local levels — as both a Democrat and Republican. Levy published Bias in the Media, an analysis of his own experience, after switching parties, with the media's leftward slant. Levy is currently Executive Director of the Center for Cost Effective Government, a fiscally conservative think tank. He is also President of Common Sense Strategies, a political consulting firm. To learn more about his past work and upcoming appearances, visit www.stevelevy.info. To read more of his reports — Click Here Now.

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

   
1Like our page
2Share
stevelevy
Obama himself admitted on 20 separate occasions that he had no power to grant such amnesty. His exact words were, "I am not king. I can't do these things just by myself."
accord, climate, dapa, ina
786
2019-44-21
Tuesday, 21 May 2019 01:44 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved