Conservative groups promise legal action against “tyrant king” Biden’s mass amnesty program

Conservative groups are already saying they will sue in federal court to stop President Biden’s new immigration amnesty proposals, as they did during the Obama administration. But new lawsuits against “judge shopping” in the judiciary could make it harder to stop the program in court.

Biden’s proposals, announced on the 12th anniversary of President Obama’s “Dreamers” Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program, aim to allow more than half a million illegal immigrants to obtain legal permanent residency without leaving the country, as long as they are married to Americans and have lived in America for at least 10 years. His plan would also make it easier for noncitizens, including DACA recipients, to obtain work visas.

But right now, getting a national injunction to block Biden administration policies may be harder, given growing concerns about “judge shopping” — the practice of both liberal and conservative lawyers seeking sympathetic judges to unilaterally block a president’s policy plans — and resistance to the idea that a single district judge can shape policy for the entire nation.

Lawyers arguing against Obama’s DACA policy were criticized for “judge shopping” when they successfully convinced a judge in the Southern District of Texas to issue a preliminary injunction against the DACA policy. On the other hand, liberal district judges issued a slew of preliminary injunctions against President Trump’s policies during his tenure.

“In some cases, there may be good legal reasons for such orders,” wrote law professors Ryan Owens and Ryan Black in an analysis of the search for a judge for Capitol Hill. “Nevertheless, there is no escaping the monarchical power that a single, unelected judge enjoys in this approach.”

Perhaps the most controversial case of “judge shopping” involved abortion opponents who brought a pivotal case before Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of Amarillo, Texas, who made a surprise ruling last year banning mifepristone, also known as the “abortion pill.” Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously struck down restrictions on mifepristone.

A columnist for the liberal publication Vox last year called “shopping for judges” “the Matthew Kacsmaryk problem.”

The U.S. Judicial Conference announced earlier this year that it would crack down on judge shopping and tighten its policy of randomly assigning judges to trials involving entire states or the entire country. The judiciary noted that debate over the issue is growing after several high-profile and controversial cases involving preliminary injunctions were filed in single-judge courts.

In March, the Los Angeles Times wrote that the Judicial Conference’s efforts to restrict judicial selection “targeted right-wing activists and politicians who have filed their cases in federal courts in Texas presided over by highly partisan judges, most of whom were appointed by Donald Trump.”

The outcome of the lawsuits challenging the Biden administration’s recent immigration policies – and whether they will be blocked by a federal judge – is expected to be closely watched by both sides of the political spectrum.

America First Legal immediately announced a lawsuit on Tuesday, saying Biden’s latest proposals were an attempt to act unilaterally on a matter that should be regulated by Congress.

“In the midst of a furious, deadly border invasion, just after the illegal immigrants Biden allowed into the country were charged with the most heinous rapes and murders of children and mothers, Biden has issued one of the largest amnesties in American history,” said Stephen Miller, president of America First Legal and one of Trump’s top political advisers. By “acting as a tyrant king, Biden is bypassing Congress and suspending the Constitution to unilaterally provide a path to citizenship for potentially millions of illegal immigrants.”

The program will be a “colossal amnesty and a massive attack on American democracy in the form of an imperial decree,” he said, adding that Biden’s order amounts to “saying that the invasion will go on forever and the criminal migrant invaders will be our new voters and citizens.”

The Biden administration is preparing for lawsuits from Republican-led states like Texas, CBS News reports. Biden will likely argue that the executive branch was forced to act because Congress has failed to pass immigration reforms. The Sun has contacted Governor Abbott and the Texas Attorney General’s office to ask if Texas plans to sue.

“President Biden’s announcement of a mass amnesty is blatantly illegal and represents a desperate bid for votes for his unsuccessful re-election campaign,” Abbott said in a statement announcing the plan, adding that it would be “rejected by the courts.”

Biden’s election-year immigration announcement comes as he campaigns to win favor with Latino voters.

“I need you, I need you badly,” he told Latino voters in a campaign speech in Arizona in the spring. “I need the help. Kamala and I need your help badly.” But Biden said he was “not interested in playing politics on immigration.” “I’m interested in solving the problem,” he said this week when introducing the new executive order.