In an apparent attempt to appease and win over Hispanic leaders and constituents, the Obama administration provided reassurance that the White House will indeed take executive action this year to stop deportations of more illegal immigrants.
"The question of executive action, my friends, is a 'when' question," Labor Secretary Thomas E. Perez assured attendees at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute's convention, The Washington Times reported.
Despite Obama's immigration setbacks, Perez insisted that the president shares their values.
However the Hispanic populace is losing confidence in the man who repeatedly promised to pass an immigration bill during his first year in office, when he had a Democratic majority in both the House and the Senate, and then again in the 2012 election. Instead, Obama focused on health care, climate change and an economic stimulus package, also battling against a Republican House which provided strong resistance to immigration reform.
A Gallup poll shows Obama's job approval ratings among Hispanics great decreasing, from 74 percent in early 2013 to 52 percent now.
On the other side of the spectrum, there are those who have vocally objected to Obama using unilateral executive action for immigration reform due to its unconstitutionality.
HNGN's own legal analyst Heather Hansen said such use of executive action could even result in a constitutional crisis.
"Congress has done its job in representing the people, as polls show that much of the public is not in favor of the DREAM Act as presented. In response, the president has searched for alternative methods to effectuate change that so far have included executive orders, memos and administrative moves," said Hansen.
Hansen then noted the relevant Harisiades v. Shaughnessy (1952) Supreme Court case which further codified the limit of executive orders on matters of immigration. In the case, Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote: "Conditions for entry of every alien....and the right to terminate hospitality to aliens, the grounds on which such determination shall be based, have been recognized as matter solely for the responsibility of Congress."
Hansen continued, "A president walks a difficult tightrope. He is granted the right of discretion and can use it - quite broadly - to impact the way laws are carried out. But it's clear that he cannot make laws - especially in areas such as immigration, which are recognized as part of Congress' responsibility. Justice Frankfurter's concurrence in Harisiades made the point succinctly:...Whether immigration laws have been crude and cruel...the responsibility belongs to Congress.
President Obama must be very careful not to tumble off his tightrope in the coming months. Contrary to his implications, he cannot make law by virtue of a pen and a phone. The Constitution simply does not allow it."
