SC ONE OF SEVENTEEN STATES SUING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OVER EXECUTIVE ORDERS
By FITSNEWS || South Carolina and sixteen other states will sue the administration of Barack Obama over its recent immigration edicts – arguing the unconstitutional declarations jeopardize public safety and place unnecessary financial hardships on Palmetto State taxpayers.
The lawsuit – one of several being filed in response to Obama’s recent executive actions – will be announced this week by S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley and Attorney General Alan Wilson. Multiple other states – including Indiana, North Carolina, Oklahoma Texas and Wisconsin – have signaled their intention to file suit as well, although it wasn’t immediately clear which states South Carolina was joining.
Earlier this week Texas Governor-elect Greg Abbott said his state’s suit would be filed “any day now.”
“We are dotting the I’s and crossing the T’s,” he told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren on Tuesday.
Meanwhile Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has already filed a suit, alleging Obama’s orders would result in the “increased release of criminal aliens back onto streets of Maricopa County, Arizona, and the rest of the nation.”
Obama’s orders – announced last month – would provide amnesty for up to five million of America’s roughly 13 million undocumented workers/ illegal aliens (pick your term). They’ve stoked controversy not only for their substance – but also the manner in which Obama is pursuing his preferred remedies.
This website has never breathed fire on the issue of illegal immigration. We’ve consistently urged pathways to status and other “progressive” reforms as possible solutions – although we’ve always acknowledged that border security (i.e. turning off the illegal alien spigot) is one of the few things government is supposed to do.
Which is why we’ve urged government to do it …
Having said all that, we don’t believe Obama can unilaterally change statues or create and fund new programs on a whim.
Can South Carolina and its fellow states win their case?
Obviously we’ll have to wait and see … but a recent report from the Congressional Research Service seems to think they will face an uphill battle.
“In several prior cases, states sought to challenge the federal government’s alleged failure to enforce immigration law on the grounds that this ‘failure’ imposes costs upon the states, which must provide public benefits and services to aliens who, under this argument, would not have been present within the state had the federal government enforced the INA,” the report concluded. “Some of these challenges have been rejected on standing grounds.”
The report added that in other cases “the court either ‘presumed’ or did not address the standing requirements, but found that states’ challenges presented a nonjusticiable political question.”
“The political question doctrine embodies the notion that courts should refrain from deciding questions that the Constitution has entrusted to other branches of government,” the report stated.
Well that’s the problem … the Constitution did entrust this question to another branch of government: Congress. And last time we checked, Congressional inaction was not a sufficient excuse for presidents to presume dictatorial power.
Congress – which is about to fall under total “Republican” control (for whatever that’s worth) – is afraid to sue Obama, though.
“Everybody I’ve talked to says we don’t have standing,” U.S. Sen. John McCain said in the wake of Obama’s ruling.