“A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation,” former President Ronald Reagan said.

America is a nation made up of immigrants from every corner of the world. Nearly every U.S. citizen can trace his or her ancestral roots to a foreign nation, yet immigration is increasingly becoming an important discussion point for politicians, judges, capitalists and voters.

For years, the U.S. faced overwhelming amounts of people, numbering in the millions, crossing the U.S.-Mexican border, both legally and illegally, in search of a new life away from poverty, violence and a host of other problems.

Last November, President Barack Obama stretched his constitutional executive powers to bypass congress and create immigration reform in the U.S.

“The actions I’m taking are not only lawful, they’re the kinds of actions taken by every single Republican president and every Democratic president for the past half-century,” Obama said, according to The New York Times (NYT). “To those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill.”

The federal rules he made, termed executive actions, are to prevent as high as 5 million illegal immigrants from being deported. Many will be able to stay in the U.S. on work permits, though there is no plan to get them full citizenship.

The president’s directive expanded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy (DACA) and started a new program called the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents. Together, the actions permit some parents and children, who are illegal immigrants, to stay in the U.S. and continue to work, according to the Huffington Post.

While Obama claims his actions are legal, more than half of the U.S. states have filed a lawsuit against the White House. This comes after a federal judge in Texas blocked Obama’s laws for the time being.

What Obama did in November is termed an executive action, which differs from an executive order in terms of its legal power. Executive actions are not as legally binding as executive orders, because they are not published in the Federal Register, according to political journalist Tom Murse.

Andrew Hanen, the U.S. district judge to spearhead the lawsuit, said the executive actions are harmful to state-level governments. Hanen, who former President George W. Bush appointed, argues it is unfair for the federal rule to force states to pay for benefits to those immigrants protected under the directive, according to CNN.

On Feb. 23, the Justice Department made a move to derail Hanen’s judicial ruling, reported the Huffington Post. The department registered an appeal that, if approved, would grant the White House permission to continue its immigration reform actions. This would not completely stop the 26-state lawsuit from undergoing judicial review.

The issue of giving illegal immigrants amnesty divides the aisle in Congress, which is the reason lawmakers were unable to pass a law of their own. Many conservatives believe what the president did was possibly illegal and dangerous to the integrity of the country.

Others, who have a more loose interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, believe the president was well within his rights to make immigration reform.

Several of the states that joined the lawsuit include Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Indiana, Maine, Texas and Utah. Many students from the Northeast region, including Pennsylvania, did not join. A wide variety of states, ranging from the south to the Midwest region, did join the lawsuit.

According to the Department of Homeland Security, more than 50 percent of the 11 million undocumented immigrants have lived in the U.S. for more than 10 years. Most live in California, Texas, Florida, New York, New Jersey and Illinois. Of those five states, only two joined the lawsuit.

According to a Pew Research Center study published earlier this month, 46 percent of those immigrants who may qualify for Obama’s programs live in the states challenging the executive actions.

“The land flourished because it was fed from so many sources — because it was nourished by so many cultures and traditions and peoples,” former President Lyndon Johnson said.

Share