holder and obama
U.S. President Barack Obama (R) listens to a singer (unseen) along with Attorney General Eric Holder (L) after the unveiling of Holder's official portrait at the Dept. of Justice, in Washington, February 27, 2015. Holder, the first African-American attorney general, serving since 2009, will be succeeded by Loretta Lynch, the first African-American woman to hold the position if confirmed by the Senate. REUTERS/Mike Theiler REUTERS/Mike Theiler

Justice Department officials will be back in front of U.S. District Judge Hanen on Thursday to answer accusations that they misled the Texas court over questions about President Barack Obama’s executive immigration actions. Judge Hanen blocked much of Obama’s deferred action programs (DACA and DAPA) last month with an injunction. In the case, Texas v. The United States, 23 mostly Republican states are suing the White House for what they consider an executive overreach.

Judge Hanen is concerned that the administration accepted 100,000 applications for a segment of the program earlier than they said they would. He demanded that they “fully explain” their statements. At issue is whether or not that segment of the deferred action program is a part of the Texas v. The United States case and, consequently, a part of the Judge’s injunction. Confused? You’re not alone. As we reported last month, top legal scholars are divided on every aspect of this case, and so are the press.

“The question is not whether anyone in court — much less the public at large — was confused by the administration's statements. The question is whether they were explicitly deceived,” wrote Brynon York, of the Washington Examiner.

Watchdog group Media Matters argued that there was no question of deception in the case.

“York is ignoring the fact that there were always three categories of applicants and that the DOJ attorney made it clear she was referring to the ‘revised DACA,’ not the original version, which is not being challenged in the federal case in Texas.”

This most recent legal spar is the latest development in a highly politicized court case. The injunction itself helped heel Republican Tea Party lawmakers, who gave up their bid to make DHS funding contingent on the White House abandoning deferred action. Judge Hanen’s initial decision pontificated for over 100 pages, with more ink spilled on White House than specific legal question in the case. Some observers questioned the Judge’s impartiality.

The Department of Justice has asked Hanen to remove the injunction and allow deferred action to continue as they appeal the case. Last Friday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals announced that it would not fast-track the process, signaling that the court battle could drag out for months or even years. Immigrants eligible for DACA and DAPA will not be granted work permits and other benefits while the injunction lasts, but Obama promised in an interview with José Díaz-Balart that they would not be deported.

© 2024 Latin Times. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.