The federal judge in Texas has denied the U.S. government's motion to lift the temporary injunction he issued last February on the implementation of President Obama's immigration reform programs.
In a decision signed on April 7, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen threw out the motion by the Justice Department.
"Having considered the Emergency Motion to Stay, the briefing filed by both sides, and the argument of counsel, the Court hereby denies the Government's Motion to Stay its February 16, 2015 Order of Temporary Injunction," Hanen said in his decision.
Last November, Obama announced the implementation of the expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA, that would grant relief from deportation on certain eligible aliens.
Because of this, 26 states have filed a lawsuit in Texas alleging that the President exceeded his executive powers that would grant 4.7 undocumented immigrants the chance to stay in the U.S. without being deported, according to Reuters.
Following Hanen's issuance of the temporary injunction, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth District last March asking it to issue a stay order pending appeal against the Texas court's order.
The Justice Department said the injunction undermined the authority of the Department of Homeland Security to enforce immigration laws.
On Tuesday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton accused the Obama administration of misleading the court regarding the early implementation of expanded work permits to about 100,000 undocumented immigrants.
"Any premature implementation could have serious consequences, inflicting irreparable harm on our state, and this ruling is key in determining the extent to which the federal government did not present the full truth in this case," Paxton said, according to Reuters.
In his ruling, Hanen said the U.S. government's explanation on the early implementation of the immigration programs was misleading.
"The Court finds that the Government's multiple statements on this subject were indeed misleading, as detailed in the Order filed simultaneously with this Order," Hanen said. "It also finds that the remedial measure taken by counsel for the Government through the filing of an 'advisory' on March 3, 2015, was neither prompt nor fully candid."