Will the Supreme Court refuse to hear immigration executive orders case?

The Obama administration's appeal to the Supreme Court to overturn a lower court ruling that invalidates the president's executive decrees on immigration was suprisingly left off the docket this week, and some observers are wondering if the court will take a pass on considering the appeal.

The court could still add the case to its workload next week.

Reuters:

Obama's 2014 executive action, taken after Congress failed to pass bipartisan immigration legislation, was blocked by lower courts after Texas and 25 other Republican-governed states sued to stop it, contending he exceeded his presidential powers under the U.S. Constitution.

The justices must decide whether to take up the administration's appeal of a November ruling by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld a February 2015 decision by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, a city along the Texas border with Mexico, to halt Obama's action.

Obama's executive order lifting the threat of deportation against more than 4 million illegal immigrants was directed at people with no criminal record whose children are U.S. citizens. Those eligible would be able to work legally and receive some federal benefits. States were not required to give any benefits.

With some of his major legislative initiatives stymied by Republican lawmakers, the Democratic president has resorted to executive action to circumvent Congress on issues including immigration, gun control, climate policy and the Obamacare healthcare law.

These steps have antagonized Republicans, who accuse him of unlawfully taking actions by executive fiat that should be the purview of Congress.

Should the justices opt not to hear the case, Obama's program would be effectively dead, with Obama's term in office ending in January 2017.

With Obama so close to the end of his presidency, the court may feel that the case is moot, since any GOP candidate elected to succeed him would simply reverse the orders.  And it is not at all clear that Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders would continue with the appeal, since they may have their own ideas about how to grant amnesty to millions of illegals.

But it is also true that the justices may want to speak their mind about executive overreach and make the appeal a statement on the limits of presidential power.  That notion would certainly attract some of the conservatives on the court, although whether a majority would agree to hear the case is up in the air.

The Obama administration has now been challenged on the immigration executive orders in two lower courts and has failed to convince federal judges that the decrees are constitutional.  Would the administration have better luck with the high court?  Most conservatives would probably not want to take the chance.

The Obama administration's appeal to the Supreme Court to overturn a lower court ruling that invalidates the president's executive decrees on immigration was suprisingly left off the docket this week, and some observers are wondering if the court will take a pass on considering the appeal.

The court could still add the case to its workload next week.

Reuters:

Obama's 2014 executive action, taken after Congress failed to pass bipartisan immigration legislation, was blocked by lower courts after Texas and 25 other Republican-governed states sued to stop it, contending he exceeded his presidential powers under the U.S. Constitution.

The justices must decide whether to take up the administration's appeal of a November ruling by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld a February 2015 decision by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, a city along the Texas border with Mexico, to halt Obama's action.

Obama's executive order lifting the threat of deportation against more than 4 million illegal immigrants was directed at people with no criminal record whose children are U.S. citizens. Those eligible would be able to work legally and receive some federal benefits. States were not required to give any benefits.

With some of his major legislative initiatives stymied by Republican lawmakers, the Democratic president has resorted to executive action to circumvent Congress on issues including immigration, gun control, climate policy and the Obamacare healthcare law.

These steps have antagonized Republicans, who accuse him of unlawfully taking actions by executive fiat that should be the purview of Congress.

Should the justices opt not to hear the case, Obama's program would be effectively dead, with Obama's term in office ending in January 2017.

With Obama so close to the end of his presidency, the court may feel that the case is moot, since any GOP candidate elected to succeed him would simply reverse the orders.  And it is not at all clear that Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders would continue with the appeal, since they may have their own ideas about how to grant amnesty to millions of illegals.

But it is also true that the justices may want to speak their mind about executive overreach and make the appeal a statement on the limits of presidential power.  That notion would certainly attract some of the conservatives on the court, although whether a majority would agree to hear the case is up in the air.

The Obama administration has now been challenged on the immigration executive orders in two lower courts and has failed to convince federal judges that the decrees are constitutional.  Would the administration have better luck with the high court?  Most conservatives would probably not want to take the chance.