The White House on Monday warned against drawing conclusions from early questions from the Supreme Court in the landmark case, United States v. Texas, which is debating the legality of President Obama’s executive actions on immigration.
Early reports offered indications that the court may split in the case, which would leave lower rulings in place that found against Obama’s actions.
But presidential press secretary Josh Earnest recalled that early questioning in the high court’s consideration of the constitutionality of Obamacare in 2015 was not an indication of the eventual outcome, which was a 6-3 decision to uphold the healthcare law.
Reporters who recall that outcome, he said, “will remember how unwise it is to try to draw conclusions” based on early stages in the case.
“There were some legal pundits who ended up with egg on their faces,” he said.
“At this point,” he said, “I’m going to withhold any prognostications” on what the Supreme Court might decide and instead rely on “the power” of the solicitor general’s arguments.
The nine-member court now only has eight justices with the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. The court could deadlock 4-4, which would allow lower-court rulings blocking the administration’s immigration to stand for the remainder of Obama’s time in office.
During a 90-minute argument session Monday, the high court’s four conservative justices seemed skeptical of Obama’s policy, called Deferred Action for Parents and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA, which would allow parents of children who are U.S. citizens to remain in the U.S. and attain work permits without the fear of deportation. Opponents of Obama’s action say it could allow more than four million illegal immigrants to say in the country and work.
