A few random posts regarding it:
- GOP Senators send letter to Obama challenging directive. The letter requests documents from President Obama proving that he sought legal counsel to ensure that he had the right to issue the immigration directive.
- Republican Representative King thinks the directive is unconstitutional because it violates the checks and balances. He promises to sue the administration.
- Homeland Security Secretary clarifies the directive. It is not an executive order, it is a directive authorizing "prosecutorial discretion" in who they bring deportation proceedings against.
- Lyle Denniston doubts the courts can hear King's lawsuit. Courts customarily do not second-guess the use of "prosecutorial discretion," unless that has been done in a "malicious" way that is somehow discriminatory or punitive in a special way.
What rankled Rep. King, and other members of Congress, was that Congress itself had refused last year to pass the so-called "DREAM Act" that would have achieved the same kind of deportation reprieve, so -- they argued -- the President was defying congressional will in going ahead on his own.
But the failure to pass legislation, or the explicit refusal to enact a bill, does not limit Executive discretion in enforcing laws already on the books. Congress does have the power, of course, to pass a new piece of legislation to undo what DHS did last week. But the votes are not there to do that and, in any event, such a bill would be subject to presidential veto even if it had cleared Congress.
- A commentator argues that Congress should pass immigration reform - maybe the Dream Act - if it want to adjust the policy.
