United States v. Texas (2016) facts for kids
Quick facts for kids United States v. Texas |
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued April 18, 2016 Decided June 23, 2016 |
|
| Full case name | United States of America, et al., Petitioners v. State of Texas, et al. |
| Docket nos. | 15-674 |
| Citations | 579 U.S. ___ (more)
136 S. Ct. 2271; 195 L. Ed. 2d 638
|
| Prior history | Issuing preliminary injunction, 86 F. Supp. 3d 591 (S.D. Tex. 2015); stay denied, 787 F.3d 733 (5th Cir. 2015); preliminary injunction affirmed, 809 F.3d 134 (5th Cir. 2015); cert. granted, 136 S. Ct. 906 (2016). |
| Holding | |
| The judgment was affirmed by an equally divided court. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Per curiam. | |
| Laws applied | |
| Take Care Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Administrative Procedure Act, United States immigration legislation from 1952, 1965, 1986, 1990, 1996, etc. | |
United States v. Texas was a very important case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016. It was about whether a program called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) was allowed under the U.S. Constitution.
The Court made a short decision, called a per curiam decision. They were equally divided, with four justices agreeing and four disagreeing. This meant they could not make a final ruling. Because of this tie, a lower court's decision to stop the program stayed in place. The case was heard by eight justices because Justice Antonin Scalia had passed away.
Contents
What Led to the Case?
In 2013, the U.S. Senate tried to pass a new law about immigration. This law would have changed many rules about who could come to the U.S. and how. However, the House of Representatives did not vote on this bill.
President Barack Obama wanted to help families who were living in the U.S. without legal permission. He said he would try to fix the immigration system on his own. He wanted to do this without waiting for Congress to pass a new law.
In November 2014, President Obama announced the DAPA program. DAPA stood for Deferred Action for Parents of Americans. This program would allow parents of U.S. citizens or legal residents to delay their deportation. It also let them apply for work permits. The program was similar to one started by President George H. W. Bush in 1990.
DAPA, along with another program called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, would have helped many people. It would have delayed deportation for almost half of the 11 million people living in the U.S. without legal permission. Many of these families had lived in the U.S. for a long time.
Two weeks after DAPA was announced, the state of Texas sued the U.S. government. Twenty-six other states joined Texas in this lawsuit. They argued that the President did not have the power to create DAPA. They also said it would cost states money, for example, to issue driver's licenses.
The First Court Decision
On February 16, 2015, a judge in Texas, Andrew S. Hanen, stopped the DAPA program. He issued a "preliminary injunction." This meant the program could not start while the lawsuit continued.
The U.S. government asked the judge to lift this order. They wanted to start DAPA while they appealed his decision. The judge said no. He believed the states had a right to sue. He also said the President's action might not follow the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). This act sets rules for how government agencies make decisions.
The judge also criticized the government. He said they had given three-year work permits to many people even after he had stopped the program.
The Appeals Court Decision
The Obama Administration then appealed the judge's decision to a higher court. This was the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans.
On May 26, 2015, this court also said no to the government. They would not let DAPA start while they reviewed the case.
On November 9, 2015, the appeals court agreed with the first judge. They said the DAPA program should remain blocked. The court said Texas had a right to sue because of the costs. They also agreed that the President's order might not follow the APA. Some judges also believed that the Immigration and Nationality Act did not allow this type of "deferred action."
The Supreme Court's Role
After the appeals court decision, the U.S. government asked the Supreme Court to review the case. On January 19, 2016, the Supreme Court agreed to hear it. They also asked lawyers to discuss if DAPA violated the Take Care Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This clause says the President must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."
The case was heard by eight justices because Justice Antonin Scalia had passed away. On April 18, 2016, the Court heard arguments from both sides. Lawyers for the government, Texas, and other groups spoke.
On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court announced its decision. It was a 4-4 tie. The decision was very short: "The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court."
This tie meant that the lower court's decision to block DAPA stayed in place. It did not create a new precedent (a rule for future cases). The case could potentially go back to the Supreme Court later if the lower court held a full trial.
President Obama was disappointed by the decision. He said it was due to "politics around immigration." Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was happy. He said it was a victory for limiting the President's power.
What Happened Next?
Changes in the Government
After the Supreme Court's tie, the case was still active in the lower courts. The judge, Andrew Hanen, continued to oversee it. He had concerns about how the government handled some work permits. He even ordered some government lawyers to take ethics classes.
On November 18, 2016, both sides asked to pause the case. They wanted to wait until after President Donald Trump took office.
On June 15, 2017, the new Homeland Security Secretary, John F. Kelly, officially ended the DAPA program. This meant the program would not move forward. The government clarified that this decision did not affect the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. However, later, in September 2017, the Trump Administration announced plans to end DACA as well, unless Congress passed a law to keep it.
