Replies

The case will hinge on whether "prosecutorial discretion" can be used to justify a broad policy of non-deportation of millions of illegals or whether it's applicability is limited to selected case-by-case decisions.

A second question is whether he can affirmatively provide them with IDs and legal status even if he has the power to not prosecute based on "prosecutorial discretion". One is a non-action which can be rationalized (I won't say justified) by a finite budget and a much larger pool of violations which could be prosecuted. The other is an action which requires that he spend money that hasn't been appropriated for that function.

A second question is whether he can affirmatively provide them with IDs and legal status even if he has the power to not prosecute based on "prosecutorial discretion".

BINGO! Not prosecuting someone is actually within his rights as President to decide - I agree it is not justified - but, affording them legal status and benefits such as welfare, work permits, etc... IS an action which would require appropriated funding and authority from Congress, as they are listed as the people who make the rules governing immigration.

This is like the DA refusing to prosecute a known, guilty bank robber; but then demanding the bank which he robbed, to allow the known, guilty bank-robber to open an account there - using the money he stole from the bank!!

It is one thing not to prosecute, it is another to force the victims to service the attacker!