With the US Supreme Court likely deadlocked in Texas v. USA, should a small Texas court set immigration law for the nation?
In a column in Reuters, professor of Constitutional Law at the American University Washington College of Law Herman Schwartz asked this question. He predicts that with the sharp division among the justices of the US Supreme Court the vote in Texas v. USA could be a 4-4 tie (with Justice A. Scalia's replacement yet unconfirmed). If this happens the ruling of a Texas federal court that Obama's Deferred Action for Parents of American Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) could not prevent deportation anywhere in the nation becomes the US law on immigration.
He noted that the lower court's ruling was later affirmed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal in a 2-1 decision. He discussed the many issues and recourse that the executive department must address and take, respectively, in order to make DAPA work even with 4-4 scenario. He says in the event this happens the Department of Homeland Security does not have to accept the decision on a national scale as the rulings of federal circuit courts are binding only in states within the circuit, in this case Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi.
He also advocates that Homeland Security not acquisce outside of the fifth circuit so that other suits could follow to allow the courts to further discuss the issue as is what is expected in a multi-circuit system. He laments the predicament of illegal immigrants who wait in the shadows for a favorable ruling on DAPA. But he also pointed out the unrealized tax revenues from these immigrants who could have been given work permits in states opposing Obama's protective program.
Meanwhile, former US Senator Richard Lugar in his column in The New York Times said, "On immigration, law is on Obama's side." With Texas v. USA being argued in the Supreme Court, Lugar debunks the argument of Texas that the president's executive decisions lack legal sanction from Congress and have injured the state. He asserts that Congress has repeatedly given the executive branch broad powers in enforcement, more specifically on immigration laws.
Texas v. USA, according to Vox is one of the most important cases brought before the highest court this term. Without a doubt it is the most important immigration case the Supreme Court has had to decide on in a generation, if not a century.
Accordingly, the court treats the case as such. On Monday it allotted more time for the parties to argue orally and more entities were invited to give their opinion on the issue.
