Washington (AFP) - The US Supreme Court appeared closely divided Monday as it weighed President Barack Obama's plan to shield nearly half of the nation's 11 million undocumented immigrants from deportation.

If the eight justices deadlock in their ruling, due by late June, it will keep intact a lower court block on the plan, dealing a bruising defeat to Obama during his last year in office and pushing the issue to the next president.

Hundreds of immigrant rights activists massed outside in the blazing sunshine as the high-profile hearing got underway, brandishing heart-shaped signs reading "Keep families together" and "Si se puede" -- putting a Spanish twist on Obama's 2008 campaign slogan "Yes We Can."


Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, two conservatives whose support is critical in this case, sparred repeatedly with the Obama administration's attorney during an extended 90-minute session of oral arguments.

At stake is a series of executive actions the president took in November 2014 to bypass a Republican-held Congress with which he was unable to enact a promised reform of America's immigration system.

One initiative shields from deportation people who have lived in the United States since 2010, with children who are US citizens or lawful residents. Another protects immigrants who entered the country as children.

The four liberal-leaning justices appeared to defend Obama's plan and pointed to similar past actions by his predecessors.

But critics accuse Obama of overstepping his authority, a view that appeared to find an echo among the conservative justices on the Supreme Court bench.

Kennedy said it was a "legislative task, not an executive task" to determine which group of immigrants could lawfully stay in the United States.

"It's as if the president is defining the policy and the Congress is executing it," Kennedy said. "That's just upside down."

Roberts, who has insisted the Supreme Court should stand above the political fray, is likely to focus on whether Texas and 25 other mostly Republican-led states have substantial enough injury as a result of Obama's actions to have the standing to sue the federal government.

Such a narrow ruling would allow the court to eschew a decision on more fundamental aspects of the immigration debate -- an immensely divisive issue at the heart of the 2016 presidential campaign.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-high-court-takes-high-stakes-immigration-fight-161357338.html

This is exactly what GOP devils wants hence why they won't even grant Merrick Garland a hearing.

If the lower court's ruling is upheld against a Supreme Court 4-4 vote as there's a vacant seat unfilled,this would be a bad image for the Democratic party who will be needing the votes of Latinos in their large numbers come November.

Not sure I got your exact meaning, but the DACA or is it DAPA act is almost sure to be passed, not even certain whats delaying it.

tpiah11:
Not sure I got your exact meaning, but the DACA or is it DAPA act is almost sure to be passed, not even certain whats delaying it.

The fifth Circuit Court of Appeal ruled that DAPA(Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents) is contrary to the Nationalities and Immigrations Act after Texas filed against the program.Republican controlled Congress has frustrated immigration reforms,the president has had to resort to using his executive powers,so Obama came up with DACA(Deferred Action for Childhood Americans),the DAPA application case is before the Supreme Court and the vote is headed for a 4-4.Which means that the decision of the Appellate court will be upheld.

If the Supreme court ruling is in favor of Texas.The lives of almost 5million immigrants is at stake.If DAPA is sustained,DACA Act will pass.

I think you mean livelihood, or citizenship, since the act will legalize about 5 million people, going by stats.

When it's passed, another set of people will be brought in to take their former spots, while they (DAPA/DACA) settle into their new statuses and adapt to the changed circumstances, namely having papers. This will reflect on the job market, schools, income, etc.

There is also a likelihood of displacement for others who will have to make room for the newly legalized folks, since resources are finite, not infinite.