The hell you say!
(Washington Post) Earlier Tuesday, a federal court in Pennsylvania declared aspects of President Obama’s executive actions on immigration policy unconstitutional.
According to the opinion by Judge Arthur Schwab, the president’s policy goes “beyond prosecutorial discretion†in that it provides a relatively rigid framework for considering applications for deferred action, thus obviating any meaningful case-by-case determination as prosecutorial discretion requires, and provides substantive rights to applicable individuals.  As a consequence,  Schwab concluded, the action exceeds the scope of executive authority.
One of the interesting things about the decision is noted by Noah Rothman, in which Judge Schwab compares this to a president deferring tax collection. As he writes, if a president decides that the capital gains rate should be 15%, and Congress refuses to take action to lower it from 20%, would it be Constitutional for said POTUS to tell people to only pay 15%, and to defer prosecution for those who do not pay the 20%? All while demanding that Congress pass legislation to make the rate 15%?
It may be small in nature but it does send a message, in my opinion…………….