Washington, DC – Attorney General Karl A. Racine today joined a coalition of states in filing a friend-of-the-court brief urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to uphold President Obama’s executive action creating a path to legal residency for some undocumented immigrants.

The brief was filed in Texas v. United States, a legal challenge by Texas and other states to the President’s immigration reforms. The Washington State Attorney’s General Office authored the brief, which was also joined by the Attorneys General of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Virginia.

“The District, like the other states joining this brief, benefits immensely from the President’s action on immigration,” Attorney General Racine said. “We believe his actions not only fall within his constitutional authority, but also help our local economy by providing undocumented residents of our city a pathway to legal residency and the ability to work legally, support their families, and pay taxes.”

On February 16th, a federal district court judge in Texas issued a preliminary injunction in the case, halting implementation of the administration’s policies.  The Justice Department has appealed that injunction to the Fifth Circuit.  The coalition of states filed their brief with the appellate court in support of that appeal.

The brief argues that the district court erred in concluding that the immigration directives would harm states.  Rather than presenting a burden, the Obama Administration’s actions — enabling working families to participate more fully in American society, earn a fair, legal wage and pay their fair share of taxes — benefit the states by raising revenue and reducing demand for social services.

The coalition states also argue that, should the court of appeals uphold the district court’s preliminary injunction, that injunction should be limited to Texas, the only state to have introduced evidence purporting to show it would suffer harm.  At the very least, the coalition asserts, the injunction should be confined to the plaintiff states that sued the Administration.

A copy of the brief is attached.