Next month, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral argument in United States v. Texas, which is the legal challenge by Texas and numerous other states to the Obama administration’s “Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents” (DAPA) program.
That program sought to provide amnesty for 5 million illegal aliens with a stroke of the president’s pen—and it sought to insulate the unlawful action from challenge in court by claiming the action was simply within the “prosecutorial discretion” of the president.
The program was blocked by Judge Andrew Hanen, a federal district court judge in Texas, and his order was upheld on appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. It is that Fifth Circuit decision which is before the Supreme Court this term.
One of the key arguments of the government in that case is that DAPA is “presumptively unreviewable prosecutorial discretion because ‘lawful presence’ is not a status and is not something that the alien can legally enforce.”