Georgia To Join Lawsuit Over President Obama’s Immigration Order

Georgia will be joining a group of 17 other states in suing President Obama over his recent decision to block deportations for up to 5 million illegal immigrants living in the United States. Via the AJC, the Associated Press reports:

Texas is leading a 17-state coalition suing over President Barack Obama’s recently announced executive actions on immigration, arguing in a lawsuit filed Wednesday that the move “tramples” key portions of the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit raises three objections: that Obama violated the “Take Care Clause” of the U.S. Constitution that Abbott said limits the scope of presidential power; that the federal government didn’t follow proper rulemaking procedures; and that the order will “exacerbate the humanitarian crisis along the southern border, which will affect increased state investment in law enforcement, health care and education.”

The effort is being led by Texas Attorney General and Governor-Elect, Greg Abbott. Other states participating include the “mostly conservative states” of Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana and the Carolinas. The success of this newly launched GOP endeavor against President Obama’s actions remains to be seen. It also remains to be seen if this move will hurt Georgia Republicans with Hispanic voters.

:: Update ::

Via the Gainesville Times, a statement from Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens about the lawsuit:

“We are a nation of immigrants, and I value the many contributions made to our country by immigrants. We are also a nation of laws,” said Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens in a statement. “As the complaint itself states, ‘This lawsuit is not about immigration. It is about the rule of law, presidential power, and enforcement of the U.S. Constitution.’ There is no question that immigration reform is needed. However, President Obama’s unconstitutional, short-term action only adds to uncertainty faced by those wishing to live in our country.”

Meanwhile, Georgia’s Sixth District Congressman Tom Price issued this statement in support of the lawsuit:

The 17 states, including Georgia, which are helping spearhead the challenge to President Obama’s executive amnesty ought to be commended for their leadership. In the wake of the president’s unlawful disregard and disrespect for the Constitution, elected officials at both the federal and state level must pursue realistic avenues to hold the Obama Administration accountable. We have an obligation to protect and defend the rule of law enshrined in our Constitution and with it the voices of the American people we represent. By stepping forward, these states are providing crucial leadership and support at this critical time.

33 comments

  1. How much money did the state lose in legal fees for the attempt to sue over Obamacare? How much did it cost the state to join the suit to overturn portions of the Civil Right’s Act of 1965?

    How much in legal fees will it cost the taxpayer to participate in this suit?

    What part of “unlimited authority to issue pardons and clemencies from federal laws” do these gentlemen NOT get?

    Someone at this conference should accidently lose Abbott (a distant blood relative, BTW) outside by wheeling him to a designated porch.

    • Noway says:

      Obama’s action was not a pardon. As far as “what part” of the language the gentlemen don’t get? Probably the same “part” that those same gentlemen don’t get in the 2nd Amendment verbage of “shall not be infringed.”

      • seenbetrdayz says:

        Indeed, and even if it were a pardon, it wouldn’t cover continued infractions.

        Ex.: Juan jumps over the border. He broke the law. He can be pardoned for the act of entering the country illegally, but nonetheless, he continues to be here illegally.

        A pardon is not permission to ignore a law. A pardon is forgiveness for breaking a law.

  2. objective says:

    it’s hard to see this lawsuit as anything but a waste of time & money, misdirected energy, knee-jerk vitriol, and political pandering. i can’t say i know the entirety of the Executive actions taken, but it seems by and large about law enforcement priorities, prosecutorial discretion, and temporary administration. it seems that not one individual’s actual immigration or citizenship status will actually be changed. essentially, some people will get to pay taxes for a few years with a lessened fear of deportation for the time being. wait, the president is raising tax dollars and upgrading the database?
    i wage that this will eventually get tossed out of Court, whether the actions are deemed appropriate or are deemed a “political question”.

      • John Konop says:

        This will back fire…..with real legs for the Dems…..the GOP is taking the bait…..the smarter move would be to pass a bill with real teeth….in trade for a path to citizenship add the following:

        1) anchor baby must have one parent be a citizen

        2) prioritize citizenship on having a skilled job with a shortage….

        3) must make enough money to pay for all insurance needed…

        4) clean up visa procces

        If you add suggestions like this it could be a win for the GOP….

        • Dr. Monica Henson says:

          Once again, John speaks common sense. Why does the GOP not heed it? There’s a reason why the term “knee jerk” continues to be applied.

  3. xdog says:

    What a move. The suit will take forever to work its way through the courts, plus it will be expensive and a near-certain loser. Just the thing to keep the base hyperventilating and at the same time give the pols some cover.

      • Ellynn says:

        Because even if the GOP wins against Obama for doing the same thing other past presidents have done, the next time the GOP has the White House, the Dems can now sue the GOP for doing execitive orders they don’t like.

        • Harry says:

          I wouldn’t want to see a GOP president usurp legislative powers any more than a Democrat. It’s what’s done in authoritarian regimes, not representative democracies.

  4. ricstewart says:

    “It also remains to be seen if this move will hurt Georgia Republicans with Hispanic voters.”

    Please allow me to relieve you of that suspense.

  5. Joash Thomas says:

    Just as a follow-up to my original post, the following is a statement released by Congressman Tom Price (GA-06) in response to the lawsuit:

    “The 17 states, including Georgia, which are helping spearhead the challenge to President Obama’s executive amnesty ought to be commended for their leadership. In the wake of the president’s unlawful disregard and disrespect for the Constitution, elected officials at both the federal and state level must pursue realistic avenues to hold the Obama Administration accountable. We have an obligation to protect and defend the rule of law enshrined in our Constitution and with it the voices of the American people we represent. By stepping forward, these states are providing crucial leadership and support at this critical time.”

  6. seenbetrdayz says:

    If they do nothing, it basically sends a message to the present and future presidents that they can pretty much do whatever the hell they want and no one gives a ****. Personally, I think we’re already past that point.

    Congress should just be abolished. They can’t get anything done, and we’d probably be happier with a king anyway. We’ve had 200+ years of a republican form of government only to arrive back at a monarchy. It requires less burdensome decision-making and input from us lesser folk.

    So who’s gonna be the sad sap who gets to try to win over Obama’s daughters in exchange for becoming next in line for the throne?

  7. saltycracker says:

    No denying Obama spits in the face of congress. But fits aside, I thought all congress had to do was pass a bill and he’d sign it ? If a bill can’t be passed we sue or wait until January ?

    Why would the GOP take a tactic of I know my rights I’ll sue your butt that hacks folks off rather than control what they can, a bill.

    • David C says:

      Because anything approaching a legislative process will include something that angers “the base” and can be demagogued by those further right. It’s what killed immigration reform when Bush tried it, and why the House leadership sits on a balanced bill that passed the Senate with bipartisan support and would pass the House right now on a free vote.

      • Harry says:

        So? Isn’t a representative process the idea of democracy? The legislating from the bench or by executive order leads us down a very dangerous path. That’s how it’s done in Venezuela and Cuba.

    • Michael Silver says:

      We did pass a bill and its existing law.

      Obama doesn’t like the law so he’s demanding that it be changed or he’ll change it. As part of the Executive branch, he doesn’t get to make law. He is supposed to faithfully execute the laws, even one’s he doesn’t agree with.

      • saltycracker says:

        You talking about the one both sides have looked the other way on for years giving millions an Ollie, Ollie in free so we can freely exploit them while blocking the best and brightest (compliant) from working here ?

        • saltycracker says:

          President Carter and the Mariel boatlift in 1980 changed Florida forever.

          Ag and contractors were fairly compliant with HB1 until they learned an end around (later the Feds would open other doors on farm loans, then on mortgages). Even recently GA AG balked at illegal control.

          Hopefully the Repubs will not get suckered into missing a career chance to sign up those seeking opportunity and paying taxes while keeping the numbers on public supports to a minimum. The Democrats promise them a piece of the taxpayer pie when what they want today is opportunity.

          • Harry says:

            I have no problem with immigration policy that provides opportunity to motivated and qualified aspirants; but of course it should be accomplished through legislated, transparent, and equitable methods, with support and backing of voters through their elected representatives. Right now it’s a mess.

    • saltycracker says:

      Obama has met our expectations of arrogance, what we want is the GOP to meet our expectations of a bill. Are they taking the bait because they would rather challenge anything he does or is it they want this mess to go on? What are we missing ?

Comments are closed.