Skip to main content

Why Is There No Decision On DAPA From The Fifth Circuit?

Why is there no decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of appeals on the Obama administration's appeal of the District Court order temporarily stopping DAPA (Deferred Action for Parental Accountability)?  This is the question on the minds of millions of undocumented parents of US Citizens.  President Obama announced DAPA on November 20, 2015, with much fanfare and gave a sense to the immigrant communities around the US that he would finally attempt to fulfill his empty campaign promises on Immigration Reform.

I have blogged previously about how Obama could solve the problem raised by the District Court Judge by simply creating and implementing regulations, something he could have EASILY done in February when the District Court stopped the DAPA memo from moving forward, but which until today, six months later, he has not done (and it would have been in effect now)!  Don't expect Obama to help the immigrant community by moving forward in the regulatory path any time soon, if ever.

Back to the question at hand.  There are only two plausible  reasons why the Fifth Circuit has not issued a decision in this case.

First, and highly unlikely, the three judge panel is going to issue a decision overturning the District Court, and the decision doing so requires massive mental gymnastics to overcome the Fifth Circuit's prior upholding of the stay put in place by the District Court.  After all, the panel consists of the same two GOP appointed judges who upheld the District Court's decision before, two judges who are notoriously the most anti-Obama judges on this particular Circuit Court.  Obviously, if they are going to change their mind and position, they are going to have to provide amazing justification for doing so. Nothing is impossible in the law, but this potential result comes pretty close.

Second, and the most likely reason is as follows.  These two conservative Fifth Circuit judges understand that the Obama administration will immediately appeal this case to the US Supreme Court. They also clearly understand that there is a majority of the US Supreme Court which will permit the DAPA rules to proceed, based upon very recent precedent issued by the Supreme Court (last term) on executive actions.  By delaying the decision, the two judges are delaying the ability of the Obama administration to file an appeal, each day making it less and less likely that there will be sufficient time in the Supreme Court's term to accept the case, provide a briefing schedule, conduct oral arguments, and issue a written decision, prior to the end of this current term, on June 30, 2016.

Essentially, this would mean that arguments for and a decision on DAPA would occur right in the middle of the next presidential election season.   Further, by delaying the issuance of the decision, they are making it more and more useful in the GOP political primaries, when they do make the decision,  Further igniting the small base of GOP voters who oppose Obama on every issue and especially on executive action.  This is the reality of the situation. Who says judges cannot be political?

So, while we could have a decision on the DAPA appeal soon, my bet is that we are still some time away from having a decision on this case from the Fifth Circuit.

It is also becoming less and less likely that DAPA will take effect while Obama is still sitting in the White House, making naturalized citizen participation in the presidential election process vital to ensuring that someone who holds the office of President is pro-immigrant, pro-family, and pro economic growth.

Here is my take (in Spanish) on this issue, as it appeared this week on Telemundo


Comments

  1. Another possibility is that there is a dissent and they're going back and forth with drafts. That can make the decision-writing process longer. Also, the Fif just takes a while. Earlier this year we won in the Fifth on an issue of first impression (with no dissent or concurrence), and that decision took 8 months following briefing (with no oral argument).

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you meant 2014....
    http://www.uscis.gov/immigrationaction

    ReplyDelete
  3. Matthew, you really think the dissent is holding this up? This decision was written in June before oral arguments!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If You Are An Immigrant (even a US Citizen), Here Are 9 Things You Should Know

Are you a Naturalized U.S. Citizen, Lawful Permanent Resident, Visa Holder, or an Undocumented Immigrant? We recommend you take the following steps to protect yourself in our current version of America. The last couple of weeks have reminded immigrants, even naturalized U.S. citizens, that they were not born in the United States. Our office has received countless phone calls, emails, and social media messages from people worrying about what their family’s future in the United States holds. Most people want to know what they can do now to protect themselves from what promises to be a wave of anti-immigration activity by the federal government. Trump's Executive Order on Interior Enforcement has some provisions that should make most Americans shiver.  We recommend the following actions for each of the following groups: Naturalized U.S. citizens. In particular if you have a foreign accent, and you are traveling within 100 miles of any US Border (including the oceans...

Seven Reasons Why the Georgia Legislature Should Repeal HB-87

Recently the Alabama Attorney General called on the Alabama State Legislature to repeal parts of Alabama's horrid anti-immigration law ( HB 56), because of the "unintended" consequences of the bill (frankly, what happened was not unintended). Because of the similarity between the two laws, Georgia's Speaker of the House, David Ralston was asked whether Georgia Legislature would repeal part or all of HB 87, Georgia own anti-immigration law. HB 87 has caused almost a half a billion dollars in damage to the Georgia economy (along with untold suffering in Georgia's immigrant communities) without any noted or reported positive effect. Speaker Ralston plainly stated that the Georgia Legislature would NOT do anything to repeal HB 87 . While it understandable why a politician would not admit that a pet bill he shepherded and pushed through the state legislature was simply bad law, it is also clear that Speaker Ralston is facing a challenge on his RIGHT in th...

Why is USCIS Taking So Long to Renew DACA Work Permits?

If the calls to our office are any indicator, there are thousands of DACA recipients whose work permit applications were filed at least three months prior to expiration, who are still waiting for their renewed work permits.  Without renewed permits, these individuals lose the right to work legally, the right to drive, and may once again accrue unlawful presence. The DHS published a notice in October 2014 advising DACA recipients that they could file their request for extension up to 150 days (5 months) prior to expiration.  As with all things government, very few of the DACA recipients, who tend not to frequent government websites, knew about the memo and many did not file so far before expiration perhaps thinking that extending a work permit was a like extending a drivers license, its is done in a few minutes.  As an experienced immigration lawyer will tell you, the USCIS does nothing quickly, and certainly does not worry that a person may lose their job or their drive...