We have long supported comprehensive immigration reform and lamented the inability of Congress--whether it was controlled by Republicans or Democrats--to approve forward-thinking legislation. But this editorial board has also long opposed the use of executive power in ways that usurp the authority of Congress. The president is not the king.
That's why we welcome the fact that a 4-4 Supreme Court split has left in place an appellate court ruling blocking President Barack Obama's 2014 executive order on immigration enforcement that effectively rewrote federal laws affecting millions of people who reside in the U.S. without legal status.
Obama, who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, used to agree with our view. As a senator, he railed against George W. Bush's executive excesses. And for years after he became president, he acknowledged limits on his authority--including specifically on immigration. In a 2013 online chat, he was asked why his administration didn't do more to stop deportations from breaking up families.
"The problem is, is that I'm the president of the United States, I'm not the emperor of the United States," he replied. "My job is to execute laws that are passed."
A year later, he changed his mind on this issue.
But a simple thought exercise shows why the principled position of having a president who honors constitutional checks and balances is also the smart position. Imagine if the high court had ruled in Obama's favor and established the precedent of a president being able to set immigration policy--and then Donald Trump got elected. We doubt many Democratic lawmakers would then want a president with imperial powers.
Editorial on 06/25/2016