Federal Court in Pennsylvania Declared President Obama’s Executive Actions on Immigration Policy Unconstitutional
IMAGINE THAT, A FEDERAL COURT RULES THAT IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR OBAMA TO BE AN EMPEROR …
U.S. District Court Judge Arthur Schwab has ruled that parts of Barack Obama’s executive actions on immigration policy unconstitutional. It’s a start, even though any one with any common sense or grasp of the Constitution knows Obama’s executive order was Unconstitutional. Although this decision was part of a criminal case, look for this case to make it’s way through the federal court system and ultimately to the Supreme Court.
Earlier Tuesday, a federal court in Pennsylvania declared aspects of President Obama’s executive actions on immigration policy unconstitutional.
According to the opinion by Judge Arthur Schwab, the president’s policy goes “beyond prosecutorial discretion” in that it provides a relatively rigid framework for considering applications for deferred action, thus obviating any meaningful case-by-case determination as prosecutorial discretion requires, and provides substantive rights to applicable individuals. As a consequence, Schwab concluded, the action exceeds the scope of executive authority.
The full opinion can be read HERE.
Judge Arthur Schwab stated that Obama’s executive order violated separation of powers.
“President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional,” Schwab wrote in his 38-page opinion (posted here). “President Obama’s November 20, 2014 Executive Action goes beyond prosecutorial discretion because: (a) it provides for a systematic and rigid process by which a broad group of individuals will be treated differently than others based upon arbitrary classifications, rather than case-by-case examination; and (b) it allows undocumented immigrants, who fall within these broad categories, to obtain substantive rights.”
The Pittsburgh-based judge rejected a Justice Department legal opinion arguing that Obama’s actions fall within the traditional realm of the executive’s discretion about which cases to pursue and which to overlook. Schwab, a George W. Bush appointee, also quoted in detail from a series of public statements Obama made in recent years about the limits on his executive authority to make sweeping changes in immigration enforcement.
As Q and A opines, if this case goes to the SCOTUS, will the “ObamaCare is a tax” court manage to actually rule as this judge has, that the executive has unconstitutionally exceeded his power? Who knows anymore at this point. After Justice Roberts bent over backwards for Obamacare, one can only wonder whether the SCOTUS will get this one right.