Cebu_4_2
23rd June 2016, 10:53 AM
Supreme Court Ties on Immigration, Blocking Obama PlanA tied vote today at the Supreme Court leaves in place a lower court injunction against an Obama administration policy that would have offered more than 4 million undocumented immigrants the chance to remain in the country without fear of deportation. The justices were deadlocked 4-4.
The tie means the benefit for undocumented immigrants remains on hold as the case returns to the lower court in Texas that froze the action. It’s now unlikely that the Obama administration program will go into effect.
Texas took the lead for the mostly Republican-led states that challenged President Barack Obama’s action on immigration, which he announced in November 2014. The White House maintained that the states challenging the action didn’t have the right to bring the case forward in the first place.
When there is a 4-4 tie at the Supreme Court (the court is short one justice because of the vacancy left by Antonin Scalia's death in February), that lets the lower court decision stand but does not set a national precedent. The high court issues an opinion that reads only, "Per curiam. The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court."
A per curiam (by the court) decision doesn't provide information about individual justices' views on standing or substance.
The tie means the benefit for undocumented immigrants remains on hold as the case returns to the lower court in Texas that froze the action. It’s now unlikely that the Obama administration program will go into effect.
Texas took the lead for the mostly Republican-led states that challenged President Barack Obama’s action on immigration, which he announced in November 2014. The White House maintained that the states challenging the action didn’t have the right to bring the case forward in the first place.
When there is a 4-4 tie at the Supreme Court (the court is short one justice because of the vacancy left by Antonin Scalia's death in February), that lets the lower court decision stand but does not set a national precedent. The high court issues an opinion that reads only, "Per curiam. The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court."
A per curiam (by the court) decision doesn't provide information about individual justices' views on standing or substance.