A federal court judge ruled segments of President Barack Obama's immigration executive actions were unconstitutional on Tuesday.

Judge Arthur Schwab of the Western District of Pennsylvania wrote that the Nov. 20 executive actions "violate the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution" in addition to the Take Care Clause. Schwab, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said Obama's reasoning to execute the executive actions due to congressional inaction was "arbitrary" and does not meet the requirements to act unilaterally.

Schwab also said Obama went "beyond" prosecutorial discretion. He said prosecutorial discretion, in regards to immigration, could occur if the action is "broad." That includes whether to stop, detain, question, arrest or release a certain individual and whether to grant deferred action, parole or a stay of removal instead of deportation. Schwab explained Obama's executive action was unconstitutional because it provided "for a system and rigid process by which a broad group of individuals will be treated differently than others based upon arbitrary classifications, rather than case-by-case examinations" and allowing undocumented immigrants "substantive rights."

Schwab's declaration is the first judicial opinion addressing Obama's immigration executive action. His comments come as an undocumented immigrant defendant from Honduras, Elionardo Juarez-Escobar, awaits sentencing on a criminal immigration violation and whether he could be eligible of deferred action introduced by Obama's executive actions.

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

"Congress's lawmaking power is not subject to presidential supervision or control," wrote Schwab. "Perceived or actual Congressional inaction does not endow legislative power with the Executive. This measurement -- the amount/length of Congressional inaction that must occur before the Executive can legislate -- is impossible to apply, arbitrary, and could further stymie the legislative process."

"The decision is unfounded and the court had no basis to issue such an order," a U.S. Department of Justice spokesperson said in a statement. "No party in the case challenged the constitutionality of the immigration-related executive actions and the department's filing made it clear that the executive actions did not apply to the criminal matter before the court. Moreover, the court's analysis of the legality of the executive actions is flatly wrong. We will respond to the court's decision at the appropriate time."

White House Domestic Policy Council Cecilia Muñoz also defended Obama's executive actions, stating, "We are very, very confident in the legality of these actions by the president."

Schwab's declaration does not affect immigration executive action.

__

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