Judge Andrew Hanen of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas agreed that the attorneys general that DACA is unconstitutionally sound, but he didn’t end it immediately. He put a stay on it until a higher court (SCOTUS) can make the final ruling.
At the present time, the court is at a 4-4 loggerhead, but when that happens, the lower court’s ruling stands. He could have ordered the program must end immediately, but when he ruled the same way on DAPA a stay was put on his decision anyway. Judge Hanen is no milquetoast, but he knows what happened on DAPA and decided to allow it to stand until the Supreme Court can uphold or vacate his ruling.
In a 117 page opinion, Judge Andrew Hanen of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas agreed that the attorneys general, led by Paxton, were correct in their interpretation of the law — that the Obama administration’s controversial 2012 executive action violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and impermissibly orders the federal government to ignore American immigration laws.
The immigration law states that illegals can’t get benefits from being here illegally by Executive order. It requires legislation by congress. Obama knew he could never get it passed, just like his lousy Iran deal.
“This court will not succumb to the temptation to set aside legal principles and to substitute its judgment in lieu of legislative action,” Hanen writes in rejecting the defendants’ — technically the federal government but represented by a series of pro-DACA states and non-profits — arguments, which included an appeal to DACA’s supposed popularity. “If the nation truly wants to have a DACA program, it is up to Congress to say so.”
“We’re now very confident that DACA will soon meet the same fate as the Obama-era Deferred Action for Parents of Americans program, which the courts blocked after I led another state coalition challenging its constitutionality,” Paxton said in a statement following Hanen’s ruling.
“President Obama used DACA to rewrite federal law without congressional approval. Our lawsuit is vital to restoring the rule of law to our nation’s immigration system. The debate over DACA as policy is a question for lawmakers, and any solution must come from Congress, as the Constitution requires.”