Should President Barack Obama go through with his plans to use executive action to unilaterally grant amnesty to illegal immigrants, he may be met with a slew of lawsuits from several Republican governors, who said Wednesday that such judicial action will be likely, The Huffington Post reported.
The Republican governors, who are all potential candidates for the 2016 Republican presidential ticket as well, spoke at the annual conference of the Republican Governors Association on Wednesday about the possibility of various states suing the president should he bypass Congress to provide deportation relief for five million illegal immigrants.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry said it is a "very real possibility" that Texas could sue the federal government if Obama acts unilaterally on immigration, according to the Huffington Post. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker also suggested that a lawsuit is in order, as did Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.
Appearing on Sean Hannity's radio program Wednesday, Walker stated, "I think the Republicans in Washington need to take the president to court. They need to force this issue. I think it's bigger than the subject matter of immigration."
Earlier this week, another presidential hopeful, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, said that if Obama does go through with executive action, he believes the Supreme Court will inevitably step in.
"I think with regard to immigration reform, [the president] is doing something that Congress has not instructed him to do and in fact has instructed him otherwise, so I think the Supreme Court would strike it down," Paul told Fox News' Sean Hannity. "That takes a while, but that may be the only recourse short of a new president."
And last week, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, weighed various lawsuit options, and has considered expanding a proposed federal lawsuit over Obama's use of executive orders to include his action on immigration. Another option gaining traction would be to file a separate lawsuit, according to The Washington Post.
Other GOPers believe Obama's actions could reap something much worse than a lawsuit - impeachment or even prison time.
Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., one of the most outspoken immigration reform opponents, told Slate, "At some point, you have to evaluate whether the president's conduct aids or abets, encourages, or entices foreigners to unlawfully cross into the United States. That has a five-year in-jail penalty associated with it."
However, others argue, including some in the conservative legal group, the Federalist Society, that the president does in fact have the legal authority to unilaterally act on immigration, according to the Huffington Post.
"There is a difference between executing the law and making the law," said Christopher Schroeder, the Charles S. Murphy professor of law and public policy studies at Duke Law School, during the group's annual meeting last week. "But in the world in which we operate, that distinction is a lot more problematic than you would think. If the Congress has enacted a statute that grants discretionary authority for the administrative agency or the president to fill in the gaps, to write the regulations that actually make the statute operative, those regulations to all intents and purposes make the law."
"I agree this can make us very uncomfortable. I just don't see the argument for unconstitutionality at this juncture," he added.
