Judge Denies DOJ Request To Remove Hold On Immigration Executive Actions

President Barack Obama speaks during a joint news conference with British Prime Minister David Cameron in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Friday, Jan. 16, 2015. In a show of trans-Atlantic unity, Pres... President Barack Obama speaks during a joint news conference with British Prime Minister David Cameron in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Friday, Jan. 16, 2015. In a show of trans-Atlantic unity, President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron pledged a joint effort on Friday to fight domestic terrorism following deadly attacks in France. They also strongly urged the U.S. Congress to hold off on implementing new sanctions on Iran in the midst of nuclear talks. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

HOUSTON (AP) — A federal judge in Texas has kept in place a temporary hold on President Barack Obama’s executive action that sought to shield millions of immigrants from deportation, rejecting a U.S. Department of Justice request that he allow the action to go ahead.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville refused late Tuesday night to lift the preliminary injunction he granted on Feb. 16 at the request of 26 states that oppose Obama’s action.

Hanen’s latest ruling upholds the status quo — that the Obama administration is temporarily barred from implementing the policies that would allow as many as 5 million people in the U.S. illegally to remain.

The Justice Department had already appealed to a higher court, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, to lift Hanen’s injunction. The appeals court was scheduled to hear arguments on whether the injunction should be lifted on April 17.

In his order Tuesday denying the government’s request, Hanen said the government hasn’t “shown any credible reason for why this Directive necessitates immediate implementation.”

There was no immediate comment from the White House.

The coalition of 26 states, led by Texas, filed the lawsuit to overturn Obama’s executive action, arguing that it is unconstitutional and would force them to invest more in law enforcement, health care and education.

Justice Department attorneys have argued that keeping the temporary hold harms “the interests of the public and of third parties who will be deprived of significant law enforcement and humanitarian benefits of prompt implementation” of the president’s immigration action.

Obama announced the executive orders in November, saying a lack of action by Congress forced him to make sweeping changes to immigration rules on his own.

Before ruling on the injunction, Hanen said he first wanted to hear from federal prosecutors about allegations that the U.S. government had misled him about the implementation of part of the immigration plan.

The first of Obama’s orders — to expand a program that protects young immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the U.S. illegally as children — had been set to take effect Feb. 18. The other major part would extend deportation protections to parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country for several years. That provision was slated to begin on May 19.

Hanen issued his initial injunction believing that neither of those orders had taken effect. About a month later, the Justice Department confirmed that more than 108,000 people had already received three-year reprieves from deportation and work permits, but DOJ attorneys insisted the moves were made under 2012 guidelines that weren’t blocked by the injunction. The DOJ apologized for any confusion, but Hanen seemed unconvinced during a hearing last month and threatened to sanction the attorneys.

He wrote Tuesday that while the federal government had been “misleading” on the subject, he would not immediately apply sanctions against the government, saying to do so would not be “in the interests of justice or in the best interest of this country” because the issue was of national importance and the outcome will affect millions of people.

“The parties’ arguments should be decided on their relative merits according to the law, not clouded by outside allegations that may or may not bear on the ultimate issues in this lawsuit,” Hanen wrote.

In a separate order Hanen, told the government it has until April 21 to file to the court and plaintiffs detailed information about its March advisory about the 108,000 three-year reprieves.

The order asks the government to produce “any and all drafts” of the advisory, including information on when each draft was written, edited or revised. Hanen also asked for a list of each person who knew about the advisory.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Latest News
6
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Can someone please explain how a single District Court judge in Texas can tell the White House what it can and cannot do? I am really confused…and have no doubts that this ruling will be overturned. It’s just another ineffectual attempt to delay and stymie the President from carrying out his Constitutional duties. Enough obstructionism from the GOP!

  2. You have not answered my question, and you present facts not in evidence. The White House is NOT ignoring the “law of the land.” Stop reading Newsmax, and/or listening to Fox “News.” Will a real lawyer please come forward to answer my original inquiry?

  3. Please stop displaying your near-total ignorance of this subject. The President’s actions (or inactions) are completely within his prosecutorial discretion. Enough of the Fox “News” propaganda. That “single district court judge” has juridiction in his district, not the entire country. I’ll be glad to continue this discussion with someone who actually knows what they are talking about, not a Foxbot. We’re done, son.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

2 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for epicurus Avatar for puppies

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: