Paxton secures victory for Rule of Law/Separation of Powers

And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
Luke 20:25

This morning, the United States Supreme Court sided with Texas over the Obama administration in the lawsuit related to the President's unilateral alteration of immigration policy in 2014.  We don't particularly care about the policy or political implications, but the legal and constitutional ramifications are huge.  This is the biggest restraint upon the executive branch, at least on the domestic side, we've seen in a long time (possibly in our lifetime).

The crux of the matter is that the president cannot make unilateral changes to any aspect of domestic policy without the approval of congress.  This is a universal principle, regardless of the identify of the President or the members of Congress at any particular moment.  And Ken Paxton's Attorney General's office was the one to secure the ruling!

As Paxton explained in an e-mail to supporters:

I want to let you know that within the past hour, we have won a major victory for the rule of law. In April, my team and I were at the U.S. Supreme Court leading a 26-state coalition to fight President Obama's unconstitutional push for amnesty — an unlawful act which defies the rule of law and bypasses our elected officials in Congress. I’m pleased to report that our efforts were successful.
 
As the Washington Post reports in the story below, “The action deals Obama perhaps the biggest legal loss of his presidency…..”.
 
Today’s decision keeps in place what we have maintained from the very start: one person, even a president, cannot unilaterally change the law. This is a major setback to President Obama’s attempts to expand executive power, and a victory for those who believe in the separation of powers and the rule of law.

Bottom Line: There's a reason why, in both the Texas and U.S. constitution, the legislative branch appears before the executive; kudos to Ken Paxton for securing this ruling.

-----

Now that we think about it, there actually is one political point worth making: There's no way in heck this happens if Dan Branch is Attorney General.