By Eric Stock
NORMAL – The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling blocking President Obama’s executive orders on immigration might not settle the issue once and for all.
Meghan Leonard, a politics and government professor at Illinois State University, told WJBC’s Scott Laughlin, said since the court deadlocked on the issue in a 4-4 vote, should a new president look to implement the orders a ninth justice could serve as the tiebreaker.
PODCAST: Listen to Scott’s interview with Leonard on WJBC.
“If Hillary Clinton gets elected and she continues to impose these executive orders, I think it’s quite certain the question of whether or not the president has this type of power will come back to the court,” Leonard said.
President Obama’s orders were intended to spare millions of illegal immigrants from deportation.
The Republican-led U.S. Senate has not held hearings for President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said the next president should select the successor to the late Antonin Scalia.
DUIs
U.S. Supreme Court justices have provided some clarity as to what law enforcement can do when they pull over a suspected drunk driver.
In a 5-3 ruling, the court ruled police must get a warrant if they want to do a blood test on the suspect, but a warrant is not required for a breathalyzer test. Leonard said a suspect can still refuse a breath test.
“They can try to get a breathalyzer, you can refuse it or they can draw your blood and in order to do that they need a warrant,” Leonard said. But they can’t criminalize you for saying ‘no.’
The consolidated ruling came from separate cases in Minnesota and North Dakota.
Guns
The high court also has ruled that those convicted of domestic abuser may lose their right to own a gun.
“The Supreme Court went in and clarified what the federal law meant in this case. In the federal law, not only can you take away the guns for misdemeanor domestic violence, but you can take away guns for state misdemeanor domestic violence charges,” Leonard said.
Leonard said the ruling was based on a legal challenge in Maine. Two plaintiffs claimed they shouldn’t be subject to a federal weapons ban because their cases involved reckless conduct – misdemeanors in both cases.
Eric Stock can be reached at [email protected].
