On April 18, 2016 the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the U.S. v Texas immigration case. At stake is the fate of the expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA+) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) immigration policies.
These policies would provide, on a temporary basis, protection from deportation and work authorization for certain undocumented immigrants who are either parents of American children or permanent residents, or came to the United States as children. Yet these policies are currently blocked from implementation due to an overtly political challenge brought by Republican Governors and Attorneys General from Texas and twenty-five other states.
David Leopold, an immigration attorney and past president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), who serves as legal counsel for America’s Voice, has drafted a series of must-read assessments of the key questions surrounding the U.S. v Texas.
- Explaining the political nature of the case: “Yes, United States v. Texas Is Really An Epic Political Battle”
- Examining the issue of standing: “Now It’s Chief Justice Roberts’ Turn To Take Care”
- On the consequences of a 4-4 split in this case: “Preventing Supreme Chaos: It’s Up to The Chief”
- Recapping the core arguments in the Department of Justice’s legal brief: “Six Key Reasons why President Obama Thinks SCOTUS Should Uphold His Immigration Executive Actions”
- Analyzing the plaintiffs’ legal brief before the court, noting their reliance on confusion and obfuscation of the law: “When Your Argument Is Wrong As A Matter of Law: The Texas Immigration Response”
- Highlights from the Department of Justice reply brief: “Obama Reply Raises The Stakes For SCOTUS: Texas is Flat Out Wrong on Immigration Law”, with additional analysisfrom Marshall Fitz
For additional resources, including legal analysis; the origins of the case; the economic impacts of DAPA and DACA; and real-life stories of the people directly affected click here.