Politicians, pundits and law experts have questioned the legality of President Barack Obama's Nov. 20 immigration executive action, but experts during a press call this week reinforced the president's orders as lawful.

With lawmakers from the House of Representatives set to host hearings about the legality of Obama's executive actions on Tuesday, Walter Dellinger, former assistant attorney general for the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel and partner at O'Melveny and Myers, LPP, referred it as "somewhat odd."

Dellinger said the immigration executive actions are within Obama's prosecutorial discretion, and Congress should instead have a debate on how to handle and prioritize immigration instead of having hearings.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., announced the hearing a day after Obama's immigration executive actions. According to Goodlatte, Obama went "all-in against the Constitution," adding, "Unfortunately for the American people, the president has ignored their opinions and forged ahead with his plan, creating a constitutional crisis and an untold number of consequences for the American people and legal immigrants."

Goodlatte said Congress will "use the best tools available" to stop Obama from implementing the "unconstitutional" immigration executive orders plan.

Stephen Legomsky, a John S. Lehmann University professor at Washington University School of Law and a former Chief Counsel to the federal immigration services agency, said Obama has "spent every penny" Congress provided him on immigration enforcement while deporting a record number of immigrants.

Must Read: Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA): Details on Who's Included & Excluded - What You Need To Know

"As to deferred action: This is just one specific form of prosecutorial discretion. The President is not making it up," Legomsky said during the press call conducted by the Center for American Progress. "The statute, the formal regulations, and a long line of court decisions explicitly recognize deferred action by name, and it's been used by every Administration for several decades. The same is true of work permits. The statute authorizes the Administration to grant work permits, and the formal regulations since at least 1987 specifically say they may grant work permits to people who have received deferred action."

Legomsky clarified the misconception that Obama's immigration executive actions rewrote existing immigration laws, stating the president exercised discretionary power that current immigration laws have "explicitly recognized for many years."

Dellinger and Legomsky said Congress has the responsibility to act on immigration and should not be discouraged by Obama's executive actions.

"If they're truly unhappy with the president's temporary measures, then that's all the more reason to pass a law that provides a permanent fix, just as the Senate has done and just as the president has been urging for two years," Legomsky said.

__

For the latest updates, follow Latin Post's Michael Oleaga on Twitter: @EditorMikeO or contact via email: m.oleaga@latinpost.com.