A federal judge in Texas ruled against the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program on Wednesday, saying that the policy, which prevents people who were brought illegally into the U.S. as children from being deported, was unconstitutional. 

In his 40-page opinion for the Southern District of Texas, federal Judge Andrew Hanen ruled that the executive branch cannot “usurp” congressional authority. More than half a million illegal immigrants have been shielded from deportation because of the Obama-era rule, which was later adopted and amended by the Biden administration. 

“While sympathetic to the predicament of DACA recipients and their families, this court has expressed concerns about the legality of the program for some time. The solution for these deficiencies lies with the legislature, not the executive or judicial branches. Congress, for any number of reasons, decided not to pass DACA-like legislation,” Hanen wrote.

“Congress’ alleged failure to pass, or, stated differently, its decision not to enact legislation, does not empower the Executive Branch to ‘legislate’ on its own — especially when that ‘legislation’ is contrary to actual existing legislation. The Executive Branch cannot usurp the power bestowed on Congress — even to fill a void,” the judge added. 

Hanen’s ruling came after nine states, including Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas, and Mississippi, sued to stop DACA, saying that it was unlawfully implemented by both the Obama and Biden administrations. When announcing the complaint in December, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said that the Biden administration was attempting to implement “mass amnesty” through executive authority. 

The federal government, New Jersey, and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) have argued for DACA. 

The court order adds that the decision does not require the Department of Homeland Security or the Justice Department to “take any immigration, deportation, or criminal action against any DACA recipient, applicant, or any other individual that would otherwise not be taken.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP

The fate of DACA will likely be determined by the Supreme Court, which previously ruled 5-4 in 2020 that the Trump administration could not end the program. 

The Biden administration said it was disappointed by the decision, adding that it would push Congress to pass DACA-style legislation. 

“During this Administration, hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients have been able to live and work lawfully in our country without fear of deportation,” a statement from the White House said. “We are committed to protecting all the Dreamers who have throughout their lives enriched our communities and our country, and we continue to call on Congress to provide permanent protection to the hundreds of thousands of Dreamers in the United States.”

Attorneys working with one of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) agent whistleblowers in the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden released their client’s notes in response to an FBI agent’s testimony casting doubt on a key claim.

IRS supervisory special agent Gary Shapley wrote down that Delaware’s U.S. Attorney David Weiss stated in an October 2022 meeting that he was “not the deciding person” when it came to bringing charges in the case, as shown in a document obtained and published by CBS News.

Shapley’s attorneys wrote to the leaders of the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday declaring that they were sharing an unredacted copy of the notes in response to a Washington Post report that revealed Thomas Sobocinski, a senior FBI agent also involved in the Biden inquiry, told the congressional panel that he left the same October 2022 meeting believing that Weiss did have the authority to bring charges.

“According to the Washington Post story, Mr. Sobocinski reportedly failed to recall in his interview with Committee staff certain details of the meeting recorded in SSA Shapley’s email,” attorneys Tristan Leavitt and Mark Lytle said in their letter.

“However, Mr. Sobocinski apparently acknowledged that he took no notes in the meeting, nor did he document it in any contemporaneous fashion afterwards,” they added. “By contrast, SSA Shapley took notes during the meeting. These notes, combined with his fresh memory of the meeting, formed the basis for the email he sent later that day and corroborate his current recollection.”

Shapley’s email correspondence was previously given to the House Ways and Means Committee and then disclosed to the public. Similar to his handwritten notes, Shapley’s email expressed that Weiss had told investigators at the October 2022 meeting he was not the “deciding person” when it came to charges. Shapley’s IRS superior, Darrell Waldon, replied by thanking Shapley and saying, “You covered it all.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

Shapley, who was joined by fellow IRS agent Joseph Ziegler in coming forward as a whistleblower, brought forth allegations that the criminal inquiry into Biden was slow-walked by top officials in a way that could have precluded serious charges.

Amid increasing scrutiny on his years-long investigation, Weiss went from saying he had the “ultimate authority” to acknowledging discussions with Department of Justice (DOJ) officials who “assured” him that he would have power to bring charges outside of his district if it proved necessary.

Weiss and Biden’s legal team eventually settled on a plea agreement involving tax evasion and gun charges that could have kept the first son out of prison. But the agreement — dubbed a “sweetheart plea deal” by Republicans — fell apart this summer after a judge raised concerns about an immunity clause.

The DOJ indicated last week that Weiss, now with special counsel powers, intends to seek an indictment against Biden on gun charges by the end of the month, while one of Biden’s lawyers argued in a statement that a pre-trial diversion agreement “remains valid and prevents any additional charges from being filed.”

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has indicated that the prospect of the first son receiving “special treatment” is an area of interest for investigators as they engaged in an impeachment inquiry against President Joe Biden. The White House has called on the media for assistance in fending off the inquiry.