Feds ask Appeals Ct to allow Obama immigration plan to proceed
Motion for Emergency Stay filed in 5th Circuit.
The U.S. government just filed a Motion for an Emergency Stay in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, allowing Obama’s immigration executive action to proceed. A full copy of the motion (without Exhibits) is embedded at the bottom of this post.
Here’s the opening paragraph of the Motion:
The Federal Government seeks an immediate stay pending appeal of a nationwide preliminary injunction against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) seeks to effectively prioritize the removal of aliens who have recently crossed the border, committed crimes, or threaten public safety and national security by, inter alia, establishing guidelines for considering requests for temporarily deferring removal of other aliens who pose no such threats and have longstanding and close family ties to the United States. The preliminary injunction restrains the exercise of that prosecutorial discretion, a quintessentially executive function that is traditionally unreviewable. In so doing, it undermines the Secretary’s authority to enforce the Nation’s immigration laws by disrupting the Secretary’s comprehensive effort to effectively allocate limited enforcement resources.
This takes place against the backdrop of the District Court scheduling a hearing on March 19 into whether the feds lied about implementation of the immigration executive action, and possibly were in violation of the District Court’s injunction. That meant that the District Court injunction was in effect at least until March 19, and likely beyond.
This Emergency motion in the 5th Circuit is, in many ways, the whole ball game. If the stay is refused — so the injunction remains in effect — the Obama executive action is on indefinite hold. If the 5th Circuit grants the stay and effectively ends the injunction, then the immigration plan gets implemented, making it unlikely that 4-5 million new legal residents ever would have that status revoked.
It’s unclear when the 5th Circuit would rule on the Emergency request, but we almost certainly are talking days not weeks.
(update) The court docket reflects that the feds have requested a ruling by March 26, somewhat longer than I expected. By so scheduling the 5th Circuit motion for just a week after the District Court hearing, the feds ensure a relatively speedy hearing before the 5th Circuit after the District Court presumably denies the request for a stay:
(update 3-13-2015 — the court docket has an entry indicating the Court has given the States until March 23 to file their opposition to the motion for a stay.)
Almost simultaneously, 14 states plus the District of Columbia filed an Amicus Brief supporting the feds’ request for a stay (full embed at bottom of post):
A single State cannot dictate national immigration policy, yet that is what the district court allowed here. Relying entirely on Texas’s speculative claims, the district court enjoined vital immigration reforms nationwide. Those reforms will benefit millions of people and their families, as well as the States in which they reside. This Court should stay the district court’s order because the United States is likely to prevail on the merits of its appeal, the stay will not harm Plaintiffs, and a stay is overwhelmingly in the public interest. At the very least, this Court should
stay the order outside Texas, as no other State has presented any evidence that it will suffer the irreparable injury needed to justify injunctive relief. As the States joining this brief show below, States will benefit from these immigration reforms. The amici States should not have to live under an improper injunction based on harms other States incorrectly claim they will suffer.
More details and analysis to follow.
Texas v. U.S. – Immigration Case – 5th Cir – U.S. Emergency Motion for Stay
Texas v. U.S. – Immigration Case – 5th Cir – Amicus Brief of States Supporting Motion for Stay
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I am glad this going to the 5th, not the 9th…..
Yes, the 9th would have issued a “Stay Put” or a “Stay Forever.”
Obama has an “immigration plan“?
I thought it was more of an “immigration free-for-all”, where by default those most willing to break our laws would be rewarded with quasi-legal status and gratis admittance to the Free Stuff Army. And those who were dumb enough to try to play by the rules, are just suckers, insert Nelson Muntz ha-haa here.
Seriously. If he has a “plan”, he should submit it to Congress and see what they reckon about it. N’est-ce pas?
Here’s an example of how insane it is if Obama’s plan wins in the courts:
Say two brothers are here from Mexico. The first arrives in 2010 by committing two immigration crimes: crossing illegally and staying over 30 days. The second brother comes to visit him on visitors visa. The second brother breaks no laws and maintains legal status. Both go to the DHS office to apply for the amnesty Obama created for them. Here’s how the conversation would go:
Brother 1: “Hi, I’m here to apply for immigration benefits.”
DHS Officer: “Great. Are you here lawfully?”
B1: “No.”
DHS: “Did you cross the border illegally?”
B1: “Yes, absolutely.”
DHS: “In addition to illegal crossing & presence, have you also been working illegally in the US in further violation of the law?”
B1: “Yes. I use a phony Social Security Number.”
DHS: “Ok, great. You qualify. You’ll receive your documents in 3 months. Get yourself a legal driver’s license and don’t forget to file a tax return to get yourself a tax refund, with money the government has confiscated from hard working American citizens. And welcome to the USA!”
BROTHER 2: “That’s awesome. I’d like those benefits, too.”
DHS: “Did you cross the border illegally?”
B2: “No. I came legally on a visa. I did not want to commit a crime because US law says that would make me ineligible for immigration benefits.”
DHS. “Right. Then did you overstay your visa, perhaps?
B2 “No. I repeat. I followed the rules. I’m here legally.”
DHS “So sorry, but since you obeyed the law there is nothing I can do for you.”
B2 “Nothing? Are you sure?”
DHS: Wait. There’s one more angle. If you can prove you worked here illegally then I might be able to revoke your visa, in which case we can say you were here illegally.
B2: “No, I have not worked illegally. I’m clean as a whistle.”
DHS “I’m very sorry, but the amnesty program rules are quite clear. Only those who can prove they have broken the duly enacted immigration laws of the United States of America are eligible to apply. If you cannot figure out how to break the law, then there is no place for you in America. Go back to Mexico.”
Very nice. And very sad.
America, RIP.
Zing.
“In so doing, it undermines the Secretary’s authority to enforce the Nation’s immigration laws by disrupting the Secretary’s comprehensive effort to effectively allocate limited enforcement resources.”
No. THAT’s a bald-faced lie, and EVERYBODY knows it.
What it DOES do is forbid the Secretary from IGNORING the Nation’s immigration laws, at the direction of the Barracula.
“seeks to effectively prioritize the removal of aliens who have recently crossed the border, committed crimes, or threaten public safety and national security”
LIES. ALL LIES. ALL THE TIME.
<>
Isn’t the state just asking that the court force DHS to perform their jobs as federal law is stated?
Curious how handing out millions of unauthorized (by congress) residency permits, work permits, Social Security numbers, etc., to illegal aliens is now simply “prioritizing the removal of aliens.”
Obama’s illegal amnesty programs aren’t about the “removal” of illegal aliens; the amnesty programs are about rewarding aliens for coming here in violation of our laws — and rewarding them with taxpayer-funded privileges and benefits that only congress has the constitutional and legal authority to bestow.
I hope the Fifth Circuit judges are as sick of the lies and double-speak from the Obama administration as I am. I also hope the first question asked of the government lawyers at the hearing is exactly how many illegal aliens have been “removed” pursuant to DACA/DAPA. And I hope the second question is how the administration’s unauthorized issuance of hundreds of thousands of DACA residency permits to unscreened (by the government’s own admission) illegal aliens is not a serious threat to the national security of the United States.
people need to start not being alive anymore…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXVdklQ84g8