Here is a roundup of my media hits in light of the Court’s grant in U.S. v. Texas.

From Ariane de Vogue at CNN:

But the potential is there if justices want to make a statement in either direction on executive authority.

“The court has the potential to make a broad statement on President Obama’s unprecedented use of prosecutorial discretion in order to re-write laws he does not like,” said Josh Blackman, a constitutional law professor at the South Texas College of Law in Houston. Blackman has filed a brief in support of Texas in the case.

“The broadest way that the Court could rule is that the President failed to take care that the laws are faithfully executed,” Blackman said. “Such a ruling could radically alter the scope of how presidents act without Congress.”

From Politico:

The decisions could become a significant rebuke to Obama on his way out the door, and pose trouble for Democrats in the midst of a presidential election, particularly if Hillary Clinton wins the nomination and continues positioning herself as a close continuation of the president.

“For all of last term, there weren’t that many surprises. This term may very well surprise people — it could tilt a different direction,” said Josh Blackman, a constitutional law expert South Texas College of Law and adjunct at the libertarian Cato Institute.

From the PBS News Hour:

From KTSA Radio San Antonio:

The High Court has decided to review the legal dispute surrounding President Barack Obama’s order shielding millions of illegal immigrants from being deported. The State of Texas has taken the lead in the effort to block the President’s orders from taking effect. A total of twenty-six states have filed suit.

Many legal experts are surprised at the wide scope the Justices will take in their review.

“There’s one question whether the President complied with administrative law with his executive action on immigration” South Texas College of Law Constitutional Law expert Josh Blackman told KTSA News, adding “The far broader question is whether his actions are Constitutional–and whether they violate separation of powers.”

Blackman said the final ruling–due by the end of June–could speak volumes.

“I think the Supreme Court decision has the potential to clarify the scope of the President’s executive power–and how much he can do without Congress” Blackman said, pointing out the issue could well end up in the lap of President Obama’s successor–depending on the outcome of the case.

“Even if President Obama wins this case, he won’t have enough time left in office to implement the policy. This would fall to a successor–whether it’s a Republican or Democratic President” Blackman said.