The article delves into the ongoing conflict between the executive and judicial branches of the US government
regarding the extent of the executive's power in interpreting immigration law. It provides an in-depth analysis of recent court rulings that have struck down executive orders on immigration, including the controversial travel ban and DACA rescission implemented by the Trump administration. The article highlights that while the executive has some discretion in interpreting the law, the judiciary holds the ultimate authority in matters of constitutional law. In this case, the
judiciary has determined that some of the executive orders violate the Constitution and have been nullified as a result. This issue is a bit tricky because it involves the separation of powers in the government. Basically, the executive branch can interpret laws in their own way, but the judiciary has the final say when it comes to constitutional law. So, in this case, the judiciary has said that the executive orders on immigration are unconstitutional and can't be enforced. The President's constitutional power to take "care that the laws be faithfully executed" gives the executive branch the unequivocal authority to interpret and enforce
the law. This power is essential for the efficient functioning of the government, and it is exercised with utmost confidence and responsibility. However, it must be
balanced with the judiciary's authority to interpret and decide on matters of constitutional law. The Constitution grants the judiciary the ultimate authority in matters of
