About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

[1] (June 24, 2016)

handle is hein.crs/crsmthabfyt0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 


CRS   Reports   &  Analysis


Legal Sidebar


Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Supreme

Court's 4-4 Split on Immigration

06/24/2016



On June 23, 2016, an evenly divided Supreme Court issued a decision that, consisit, affirms
without any opinion or indication of the Justices' voting alignment an earlier decisim of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit barring the Obama Administration from implementing two initiatives that would potentially have
granted relief from removal to millions of aliens who entered or remained in the United States in violation of federal
immigration law and lack legal immigration status [hereinafter referred to as unlawfully present aliens]. One of these
initiatives is known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) because of
the population to which it would have granted deferred action (one type of relief from removal) and work authorization.
The  other initiative involved an expansion of the Obama Administration's earlier Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals (DACA)  program, which grants relief from removal and work authorization to certain unlawfully present
aliens who were brought to the United States as children and raised here. The initial DACA program itself was not at
issue in the Fifth Circuit decision before by the High Court.

This Sidebar provides answers to frequently asked questions regarding the effects of the Supreme Court's decision.
Earlier Sidebar postings discuss the Fifth Circuit's decision, and address the nationwide reach of the ban upon the
implementation of DAPA  and the DACA  expansion that the Court upheld. A forthcoming Sidebar will explore in
greater detail the implications of the Supreme Court's split decision for future executive actions as to immigration.

What  does the Supreme Court's decision mean for implementation of DAPA and the DACA expansion?

The affirmance by an equally divided Supreme Court of the Fifth i 'a   isi  in United States v. Texas means that
a district court order barring implementation of DAPA and the DACA expansion remains in effect. This order involves
a prohibitory preliminary injunction, a legal device used to bar a party to litigation from taking challenged actions
before a court has an opportunity to hear and rule on the merits of the challenge to the actions. It is not a permanent
injunction, and the district court in this case continues to hear arguments on the merits (although it should be noted that
one factor considered by courts in determining whether to grant a preliminary injunction is the likelihood that the party
seeking the injunction will prevail on the merits). Once the district court rules on the merits in Texas, a party could then
appeal to the Fifth Circuit, with a party in that forum potentially seeking review from the Supreme Court-which could
have a full complement of nine Justices, instead of its current eight Justices, by that point. This latter scenario underlies
the suggestion some have raised that the High Court could ultimately uphold the challenged deferred action programs,
or similar programs, in the future despite its June 23, 2016, decision.

Will would-be beneficiaries ofDAPA and the DACA  expansion be removed?

In their opinions, the 10.wer ..uds in Texas have made clear that they do not view the preliminary injunction currently
barring implementation of DAPA or the DACA  expansion as affecting the Obama Administration's immigration
enforcement priorities. These priorities include aliens who threaten national security or public safety, as well as recent
illegal entrants; and eligibility for DAPA, in particular, would have been limited to aliens who are not among the
_Adminiai n's   enforcmentriorities. After the Supreme Court's decision was issued, President Obama reiterated
that would-be beneficiaries of DAPA and the DACA expansion r. Aliens who

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most