Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Oral Argument Audio Posted


by Sharon Rondeau, h/t HVA

West Courtroom of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, where oral argument took place on Friday, April 17, 2015 in State of Texas v. USA, et. al.

(Apr. 17, 2015) — The audio of oral argument on Friday on Obama’s immigration executive actions to a three-judge panel is posted at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals website.

Twenty-six states sued the federal government after Obama declared in November that under his proposed changes, certain illegal aliens would receive deferred deportation status, work authorizations, Social Security numbers, and by extension, government benefits.

On February 16, Judge Andrew Hanen of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in Brownsville placed a temporary injunction on the implementation of the executive actions.

An attorney for the United States was called first and argued that the federal government, under the U.S. Constitution, is solely responsible for immigration and removal proceedings.

Many believe that if illegals are granted the “deferred action” Obama desires, they will be able to register to vote.  Shortly before the 10:00 mark, one of the judges raised questions surrounding that issue and whether or not “the states” can challenge illegals’ right to vote.

A male judge appeared to interrupt the first judge’s questioning of the DOJ’s attorney, who claimed that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on “deferred action” as being a discretionary action of the federal government.  In response, the DOJ attorney attempted to assure the judge that deferred action “is only temporary and revocable.”

The two judges appeared skeptical of the government’s argument that its claimed “discretion” of deportation is justified.  The judges referred to Hanen’s findings that the DOJ had been “disingenuous.”

The government attorney claimed that “the District Court ignored evidence.”  Referring to memos signed by DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson on November 20, the attorney said that deportations would still go forward for cause.

“What does the law say we do?” one of the judges asked at the 26:00 mark.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.