Judge halts Obama's immigration action

A federal judge in South Texas has temporarily halted President Barack Obama’s executive orders that were poised to unilaterally enact sweeping immigration changes.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen’s decision late Monday puts on hold orders that could spare from deportation as many as 5 million people who are in the United States illegally. Without the injunction, Hanen wrote, the 26 states suing the White House would “suffer irreparable harm in this case.”

“The genie would be impossible to put back into the bottle,” Hanen, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in the opinion.

The White House, in a statement issued at 2:47 a.m., said the Justice Department will appeal the ruling and insisted Obama’s action is within his legal authority: “The district court’s decision wrongly prevents these lawful, commonsense policies from taking effect.”

The first of Obama’s November executive orders—to expand a program that protects young immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the country illegally as children—was set to take effect Wednesday. The other major part of Obama’s order, which extends deportation protections to parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country for some years, was not expected to begin until May 19.

The ruling came on procedural grounds and is not a final decision on the legality of Obama’s action, but that didn't deter Republican celebration. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in a statement hailed the decision as a “victory for the rule of law in America.” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who led the state into the lawsuit when he was the state’s attorney general, said Hanen’s decision “rightly stops the president’s overreach in its tracks.”

If the Justice Department appeals the injunction, it would be heard by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

Obama announced his executive action in November on the heels of Republicans’ sweeping election gains at the state and federal level. The White House claimed its action was carefully calculated to go to the edge of presidential discretion allowed by law, without crossing the line.

Many legal experts said Obama’s action, even if not in the spirit of the law, likely would survive judicial scrutiny. It still might, but the new decision—along with a Pennsylvania federal judge who called Obama's orders unlawful in December—casts serious doubt on that belief.

The overnight ruling could defuse a combustible situation in Washington, where Democrats and Republicans are deadlocked on a bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but not the portions of the department that would carry out the immigration orders. The legislation also would repeal the administration’s past immigration action, including its Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), instituted in 2012.

The House passed the $39.7 billion funding bill last month, but Democrats in the Senate have blocked the measure from consideration. DHS funding is scheduled to run out next week, and House Republicans have said they are willing to let it lapse and cause a partial shutdown if Democrats don’t acquiesce to their demands. But Hanen’s ruling could give House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, political cover to pass a “clean” DHS funding bill, since the fate of Obama’s orders now rests with the courts—and immediate implementation has been stopped.

“This provides an opportunity for Boehner to skip the bruising DHS funding fight without suffering a political rout,” wrote Cato Institute immigration analyst Alex Nowrasteh.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.