MALDEF’s Thomas Saenz says he’s optimistic about Supreme Court immigration case
By Victor Landa, NewsTaco
Ten minutes can be eaither a blink or an eternity, and if that’s all the time you’ve got to make your case in the highest court in the land those ten minutes had better be near perfect.
That was all the time Tom Saenz had this morning to defend the interests of three women who have benefited from Preisent Obama’s executive actions on immigration. The long awaited oral arguments in the Texas v United States case lasted only 90 minutes, thirty more than is customary for such things. The court decided to extend the presentations in order to give an extra 10 minutes to a lawyer for the U.S. House of Representatives and 10 mintes to MALDEF.
In essence, according to Saenz, three things were considered by the Justices: Do the states have standing to sue? Are the president’s executive actions constitutional (executive overreach)? And, did the president follow the proper procedures under the “Administrative Procedure Act, a federal law that governs how agencies can establish regulations.”
Most of the time and attention was taken up by the standing issue – does Texas have a case to sue the federal government?
This morning, fresh from his arguments at the Court, Saenz answered question from reporters in a press call. You can listen to it below. It’s just short of 13 minutes.
[Photo courtesy of Matt Wade/Flickir]
Suggested reading