A 4-4 deadlock in the U.S. Supreme Court Thursday has thwarted President Barack Obama's plan to defer the deportation of millions of undocumented immigrants.
The immigration case, U.S. v. Texas, centers on an executive order issued by Obama.
Texas and 25 other states sued the Obama administration over the action, arguing that the plan is unconstitutional since it conflicts with current federal immigration law. The administration, though, is arguing that the states have no standing to sue, since immigration law falls under the purview of the federal government.
A lower court previously struck down the Obama action as unlawful and issued an injunction on its implementation until the Supreme Court rules in the case.
With the court evenly divided on the case, the lower court ruling stands. The court is down to just eight justices following the death of Antonin Scalia earlier this year.
Affirmative action ruling
In another major case, the court upheld an affirmative action program at the University of Texas. The court said in its 4-3 ruling that the program is constitutional.
The case, Fisher v. University of Texas, arose after a white woman, Abigail Fisher, sued the University of Texas claiming the school denied her admission based on her race.
Thanks to an unusual law in Texas, the state grants automatic admission to the top 10 percent of students of each high school to its state university. For about 25 percent of other students, the school bases its acceptance decision on several factors, including the student’s race.
Fisher’s grades weren’t high enough to put her in the top 10 percent of her class, so she couldn’t take advantage of the rule. She was denied admission in 2008, and when she found out UT admitted minority students with lower grades than hers, she sued the school for race-based discrimination.
The university claims its race-based selection policies are necessary to provide a sufficiently diverse campus community, while Fisher’s attorneys say the 10 percent program is enough to ensure that minorities are included in the selection process.
Justice Elena Kagan was recused from the affirmative action lawsuit, since she previously worked on it as solicitor general, so a four-judge majority decided the case.
The Supreme Court is due to hand down another major decision, on abortion, before its summer recess.
case, Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, stems from a Texas law passed in 2013 that requires all abortion providers to adhere to the same building standards as outpatient surgical centers. Under the law, doctors at the abortion centers must also have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles — nearly 50 kilometers — of their clinic.
Since the law’s passage, the number of abortion clinics in Texas has plummeted from 42 to 19, and abortion activists say the number could drop even lower if the law is fully implemented. Whole Woman’s Health, the plaintiff in the case, claims the requirements are unnecessary and overburdensome. John Hellerstedt, commissioner of the Texas Health Department of State Health Services, though, argues that the new regulations are necessary to protect the safety of patients seeking abortions.
Since a federal appeals court has already voted to uphold the law, a tie in the Supreme Court would result in the full implementation of the abortion regulations.
via Voice of America http://ift.tt/28Q7U8D
No comments:
Post a Comment