The federal government has filed in U.S. District Court an Emergency Expedited Motion for a Stay of the Temporary Injunction putting a stop to Obama’s executive immigration action.
The successful plaintiff states have filed a letter opposing expedited treatment.
If the District Court denies the stay, or does not rule by the close of business on Wednesday, February 26, the feds will go to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals seeking emergency relief.
Both documents are embedded below. Discussion and analysis to follow.
Here’s part of the Intro to the government’s motion and brief:
A stay pending appeal is necessary to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS” or “Department”) is able to most effectively protect national security, public safety, and the integrity of the border. Specifically, the Deferred Action Guidance enjoined by this Court is an integral part of the Department’s comprehensive effort to set and effectuate immigration enforcement priorities that focus on the removal of threats to public safety, national security risks, and recent border crossers, thereby best securing the Homeland in the face of limited resources. Absent a stay, DHS will sustain irreparable harm—harm that would not be cured, even if Defendants ultimately prevail on that appeal….In light of the immediacy of the harm to Defendants and the public in the absence of a stay of the Court’s Order, which prevents Defendants from complying with the timeline set forth in the Guidance for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to begin accepting
The letter from the States opposing expedited treatment of the motion state, in pertinent part:
The Plaintiff States write to oppose Defendants’ request for expedited consideration of their motion filed today to stay the Court’s preliminary injunction pending appeal. See Dkt. No. 150 at 7. As this Court found, defendants have no emergency need to take applications for benefits under the new program. Mem. Op. & Order (Dkt. No. 145) at 118-21. Defendants have implicitly recognized as much, by waiting a full week from the preliminary injunction to file this stay motion. Indeed, if Defendants had any compelling claim of a looming, irreversible harm from temporary injunctive relief, they would have featured it previously. They had ample time to do so: Plaintiffs requested a preliminary injunction on December 4, some six weeks before this Court’s January 15 motion hearing….At the very least, Plaintiffs should be allowed to respond within the same seven days that Defendants enjoyed to prepare their motion after the preliminary injunction issued. It is unreasonable to demand that Plaintiffs respond, and the Court rule on the motion, in under three days.
———————————
Texas v. U.S. – Immigration Case – Motion for Stay Pending Appeal
Texas v. U.S. – Immigration Case – Feb 23 2015 Letter Opposing Expedited Stay
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY