Question

.Due to the difficulties of passing immigration reform through a Republican-controlled Congress, President Obama chose to issue the executive order "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)" as a means of protecting the immigrant children who have grown up in the United States After repeated efforts to get additional funding for a new wall along the U.S.-Mexico border from the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives failed, President Trump finally issued the executive order: "Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements" as a means of using existing federal funds to begin building the wall. What do both of these scenarios demonstrate about why presidents use executive orders?​

Answer 1

President Obama proposed improving legal immigration processes, strengthening border security, deporting people convicted of a felony, expanding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, and creating the Deferred Action for Parents of U.S. Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) program. DACA and DAPA were the most controversial elements of the president's plan with Republican critics, including Texas Governor Greg Abbott and Sen. Mike Lee (Utah), saying that the programs were a form of amnesty.[8] President Obama responded to these criticisms, saying, "I know some of the critics of this action call it amnesty. Well, it’s not. Amnesty is the immigration system we have today – millions of people who live here without paying their taxes or playing by the rules, while politicians use the issue to scare people and whip up votes at election time."[7]

Texas and the 25 states that brought a lawsuit against the Obama administration argued that President Obama did not have the authority to implement DAPA because it was essentially a new law. The brief submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Texas and the states argued that "DAPA is a crucial change in the Nation’s immigration law and policy—and that is precisely why it could be created only by Congress, rather than unilaterally imposed by the Executive.

The Obama administration argued that the president's actions were legal because Congress had given the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the ability to administer and enforce immigration laws under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The DHS secretary had the authority to decide whom to deport and whom to grant deferred action to under the INA, and "Congress has repeatedly recognized" this ability in other legislation. The United States government argued that the ruling of the appeals court, which stated that DAPA could not be implemented, "will allow States to frustrate the federal government’s enforcement of the Nation’s immigration laws. It will force millions of people—who are not removal priorities under criteria the court conceded are valid, and who are parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents—to continue to work off the books, without the option of lawful employment to provide for their families.