Defending his action, President Obama, said that the house of congress had refused to bring to vote the Bipartisan Immigration Bill that would ‘legally’ address the issue of immigration in the United States. He dared the republicans to bring the bill to the floor of congress and pass it; which is after passing in the senate in 2013 has stagnated in the congress (Knowlton 1).
The republicans were quick to point out that President Obama was acting unconstitutionally and was using his executive powers in allowing undocumented immigrants to remain in the country without the threat of being deported. They continued to accuse the president of “damaging the presidency” by abusing the office’ power. By using executive powers, they claimed, that he was destroying the legal system of passing the Bipartisan Bill.
In response, President Obama, together with his democratic sympathizers, majority of who were lawmakers released a letter with 10 scholarly views on the legality of the executive order the president issued. The scholars, in the letter, insisted that the president had not gone beyond the powers of his office.
Maricopa County’s Sherriff, Mr. Joe Arpaio, filed a suit in the federal district court challenging President Obama’s order and power to execute such a directive. In his suit, the Sherriff wanted the Court to guide the President on how to act ‘accordingly’ and obey the United States constitution. Elsewhere, Scott Pruitt, the Attorney General of Oklahoma, stated that president Obama’s order was “ill-advised, unworkable, unlawful and brazenly political”.
The republicans continued to accuse the president of pitting them against the Hispanic community, as they formed the majority of the house of congress. The republicans were keen in their utterances in order to avoid the party’s standing with Latino voters, who have become the fastest growing minority voters. They know that their