Please Research And Share A Current Or Recent Constitutional

Please research and share a current or recent Constitutional issue or

Please research and share a current or recent Constitutional issue or case from the news headlines. Please briefly share the details of this issue with the class and discuss specifically which Amendments or sections of the Constitutions are at issue. Finally, how do you believe this issue should be handled from a Constitutional perspective; note that this may be different from your personal opinions on the matter. In other words, if this issue was before you as a Supreme Court Justice, how would you decide the matter from a Constitutional interpretation standpoint?

Paper For Above instruction

The selected constitutional issue for this analysis is the recent Supreme Court case concerning the use of executive orders to enforce immigration policies, specifically in the context of the Biden administration’s efforts to prioritize certain immigration enforcement actions. The case involves questions about the extent of executive power under the Constitution, the reviewability of administrative actions, and the potential conflicts with legislative authority. This issue is highly relevant as it fundamentally touches upon the separation of powers, the scope of executive authority, and the rights of non-citizens within the United States, which are protected under several Amendments.

The core constitutional questions raised by this issue include the limits of presidential power articulated in Article II of the Constitution. Specifically, it examines whether the executive branch has the discretion to set enforcement priorities without explicit legislative approval and whether such decisions constitute a delegation of legislative authority in violation of the separation of powers doctrine. Additionally, the case calls into focus the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which provides procedural standards for administrative agency decisions, and whether executive actions bypassing these standards are unconstitutional. The Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause may also be implicated, especially if the enforcement policies threaten the rights of non-citizens to fair treatment.

From a constitutional standpoint, this issue revolves around the interpretation of the President’s Article II powers, which include the responsibility to faithfully execute the laws. The argument on one side holds that the President possesses broad discretion to prioritize enforcement efforts, viewing the executive order as within the scope of constitutional authority. Conversely, critics argue that such actions may infringe upon the legislative powers vested in Congress, asserting that only Congress has the authority to establish and fund immigration policies. The question of whether the executive overreach violates the non-delegation doctrine, which prohibits Congress from delegating its legislative authority indiscriminately, is central to the debate.

If I were to decide this matter as a Supreme Court Justice, my stance would be grounded in a balanced interpretation of the Constitution’s text, structure, and historical context. I would uphold the President’s authority to set enforcement priorities as within the bounds of constitutional powers, provided that such priorities do not outright contradict or undermine enacted statutes. I would emphasize that the President’s role includes ensuring the execution of congressional statutes and that some degree of discretion is inherent in this process. However, I would also stress that any executive action that effectively rewrites legislative policy or creates obligations beyond what Congress explicitly authorized should be subject to judicial review for potential overreach.

In applying constitutional principles, I would invoke the non-delegation doctrine but recognize its limitations, acknowledging that some delegation is necessary for effective governance. I would also consider the importance of protecting individual rights under the Due Process Clause, ensuring that enforcement policies do not violate constitutional protections of fairness and justice. My decision would aim to preserve the constitutional balance of powers by affirming the President’s authority to direct enforcement priorities while affirming the judiciary’s role in checking executive overreach.

Overall, this case exemplifies the ongoing tension in constitutional law between the need for an energetic executive and the constitutional safeguards that limit power to prevent abuse. A nuanced interpretation that respects the roles assigned by the Constitution to the legislative and executive branches is essential to uphold the rule of law and ensure a functioning system of government rooted in constitutional principles.

References

• Chemerinsky, E. (2019). Constitutional Law: Principles and Policies. Wolters Kluwer.
• Skowronek, S., & Glassman, M. (2017). Politics Across the Disciplines: Presidents, Institutions, and Policy Making. University of Chicago Press.