Last week a federal judge in Texas put a temporary block on President Barack Obama’s executive order issued late last year. Obama used his authority to allow undocumented immigrants to stay in the U.S. temporarily without fear of deportation.

This executive order is not necessarily a bad idea in and of itself, however, it is the way in which it was issued that is causing the largest debate and backlash. The fact that Obama made this decision without consulting the other branches of the government or the states conveys a very independent attitude that many are not in favor of. The president should not make any decisions that will affect the whole country without hearing from the people who have been chosen to represent its interests.

This order consisted of three main parts which the president outlined in his speech given last November. First, he wanted to strengthen resources around the border in an effort to “stem the flow of illegal crossings and speed the return of those who do cross over.” Second, he wanted to make it easier for undocumented immigrants who are contributing members of society to remain in the U.S. Third, he wanted to implement a system that will assist in dealing with the undocumented immigrants already residing in the country.

The dilemma that many people, not just conservatives, are having with the executive order is that it was implemented without the input of the people. Seventeen states have gone as far as to sue in order to halt the plan from going any further.

When Federal Judge Andrew Hanen of Texas issued his order blocking the president’s plan, he said that the states’ lawsuit should continue. Obama’s executive order will be very damaging unless there is some type of preliminary injunction. The Obama administration is now attempting to get an emergency stay for the order, which would essentially undo Hanen’s efforts and automatically allow many illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. temporarily.

Hanen said of the executive order, “The genie would be impossible to put back in the bottle” because allowing a number of people this large to stay in the U.S. is a “virtually irreversible action,” according to a Feb. 17 Associated Press article. The states that are against the executive order argue that Obama’s actions are a direct violation of the “Take Care Clause” of the U.S. Constitution. This clause states that executive actions are limited. According to the article, “the states also say that Obama’s order would force increased investment in law enforcement, health care and education.”

The Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, agrees with the states that are fighting back against Obama’s order. Boehner said Obama doesn’t have the authority to take the kinds of actions he once referred to as “ignoring the law” and “unwise and unfair,” according to the article. Boehner encompassed the fears of the states. They feel that their voices are being ignored by Obama because he did not consider their opinions before issuing this order.

Obama essentially has attempted to make an incredibly important and life-altering decision without consulting the very people that his decisions will be directly affecting. The outrage that many are feeling because of the president’s actions stems from the fact that as president, citizens of the United States should be his primary concern at all times. The executive order that many U.S. citizens are not in favor of is not only causing states to feel anger at the order itself, but at the ignorance involved in the decision-making.

Victoria Razzi is a freshman magazine journalism major. Her column appears weekly. She can be reached at vcrazzi@syr.edu and followed on Twitter at @vrazzi.

Published on February 23, 2015 at 12:15 am