Judge Considers Arpaio Lawsuit Against Obama Immigration Action

A federal judge in Washington critiqued her peer's finding that the president's action was unconstitutional.
A seemingly amused federal judge heard arguments Monday in a lawsuit against immigration policies announced by President Barack Obama in November.

The lawsuit by Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio says Obama's action that postpones deportations for up to 5 million people and a program the president established in 2012 for young immigrants are unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell smiled often as she questioned Arpaio’s lawyer, Larry Klayman, about the specifics of the suit in a preliminary injunction hearing in the District of Columbia.

[READ: Obama Immigration Action Unconstitutional, Judge Says]

“I’m well aware of my power to undo executive actions,” Howell said, “and I do exercise that power humbly.” But she made no hint that she planned to do so this time.
The primary policy Arpaio is challenging would allow people living in the U.S. illegally for five years and who have children who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents to postpone deportation and receive work permits. In May, the more than 4 million people eligible can request this status.
Another policy expands the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which since 2012 has allowed people brought illegally to the U.S. when they were young to avoid deportation. Arpaio is challenging the expansion and the program itself.
Howell sounded deeply skeptical of his arguments, referring to deferred action for certain classes of immigrants as a “longstanding practice for the prioritization of resources” by the executive branch.
Klayman said that may be true, but it’s still unlawful. He asked the judge to find that Arpaio has standing – in his personal and professional capacities – and to find the policies unconstitutional. He suggested she could sidestep the constitutional question by finding that the policies violate the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires a public notice and comment period for some regulations