Dreams dashed by latest US Supreme Court ruling

"The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court." How can such so few words crush the dreams of so many?

On June 23, 2016, the US Supreme Court, in a 4-4 vote, issued this one- page,   one-sentence, nine-word ruling that effectively blocked the Obama administration's efforts to protect about five million undocumented immigrants, specifically, parents of US citizens and greencard holders, from deportation and grant them permits to work legally in the US. The case, US v. Texas, No.15-674, centers around a presidential program entitled Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, which was unilaterally carried out through executive fiat by President Obama. Texas and other 25 states sued the President accusing him of unconstitutionally bypassing Congress and ignoring administrative rules. The implementation of this program was previously stopped by a lower US District Court, which was affirmed by the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals and as decided by the US Supreme Court, remains stalled.

Clearly, this latest decision has a vast impact on so many fronts - political, economic, social, cultural, etc. Of course, the threat of deportation looming around their heads on a daily basis, these affected undocumented immigrants are anxious of the effects of separation from their families. The US economy thrives on the backs of immigrant workforce who for the most part contribute to its growth and sustainability. While the Court did not decide the substantial merits of the case, yet it gives pause to the Obama administration on how it carries out future immigration policy initiatives. With his term ending in about six months from now and with a Republican Congress unwilling to cooperate with him, frankly, the chance of passing a comprehensive immigration reform law within Mr. Obama's presidency is between nothing to zero.

Take note that the ruling was a tie decision. This is where we see the very important need to have a full Court of nine justices. Had there been no vacancy, we just wonder which way the Court could have tilted.

Which leads us to realize where we are presently. America is in the thick of the election year. Regardless where you are in the immigration debate, voters must know where each candidate stands on the immigration dilemma and how they plan to solve this riddle. Either one is running for president or for a local or statewide office, voters are entitled to be told of what specific substantial policies these candidates would take.

Let us also not forget the fact that, if Senate Republicans are adamant about not conducting hearings for the Obama appointee to the Supreme Court, the next president would have to appoint and fill in that vacant seat. Considering the ideological leanings of a present day divided Supreme Court and the position as a lifetime tenure, that appointment , either by a Democratic or a Republican president, would have very tremendous nation-changing consequences.

* * *

As I am writing this column, the news of Britain leaving the European Union has shocked the world leaving other countries eerily wary of how it impacts them economically. Already, world markets from the US, Asia and Europe reacted negatively with stocks and currencies tumbling down to one of its sharpest drops. These negative effects, the prevailing climate of uncertainty and potential instability will remain to be seen in the months or years to come as global investors remain cautious on where and how they pour in their investments. The US has already been affected by this earth- shattering shift and as past experiences teach us, how the US moves and reacts, being the largest economy in the world, the rest of the countries, including the Philippines, will also be greatly impacted.

It would also be very compelling to see how the British exit vote ( Brexit as they call it ) affects the Philippine economy not just in the immediate aftermath of the vote but also the future and long term economic relations between the two countries. The United Kingdom, being the largest European investor in the Philippines, would have to realign its economic policies with the circumstances it has to deal with in light of its leaving the EU. It is also significant to point out that the Brexit leave vote was also fueled in part by an anti-immigration sentiment. With a quarter of a million Filipinos working in the UK and still many more wanting to work there, it would be worth to observe what immigration policies the UK would adopt from here on.

* * *

This column is not a substitute for professional legal advice obtained from a US licensed immigration attorney. The information contained herein does not constitute a warranty or guarantee or legal advice regarding a reader's specific immigration case. No attorney-client relationship is and shall be established with any reader.

For any questions, comments and observations, please contact Atty. Marco Tomakin at [email protected]