A federal judge in Pennsylvania on Tuesday ruled unconstitutional many of President Obama's recent immigration actions.

U.S. District Court Judge Arthur Schwab slammed the “arguably unequal and arbitrary immigration enforcement,” in a case dealing with an immigrant living in the U.S. illegally.

ADVERTISEMENT

He called Obama’s assertion that he needed to act because of congressional inaction “arbitrary.”

“Presidential action may not serve as a stop-gap or a bargaining chip to be used against the legislative branch,” Schwab said in his opinion, first posted by The Washington Post’s “Volokh Conspiracy” blog.

Schwab's opinion is the first judicial ruling to address Obama's announced executive action last month to delay deportations for certain immigrants and allow them to apply for work permits. The move was lauded by immigration activists, but harshly criticized by conservatives who viewed it as executive overreach.

But Schwab’s ruling comes in a criminal case that did not directly challenge the constitutionality of the president's action.

The case involves a Honduran man who was deported in 2005 and later caught after re-entering the country. Police arrested Elionardo Juarez-Escobar earlier this year and charged him with driving under the influence, after he recorded a blood alcohol content of 0.18 percent.

Schwab deemed it necessary to rule on Obama’s actions in order to decide whether the new policies apply to Juarez-Escobar.

Other cases, though, are directly challenging the action and could have broader effects on the president's policies.

A slew of states, led by Texas Gov.-elect and Attorney General Greg Abbott, filed one of those direct challenges to the immigration policies in Texas. Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio is also suing.

Schawb’s decision agrees with many of the points of Abbott’s challenge, mainly that Obama violated the Constitution’s “Take Care Clause,” which empowers the executive branch to carry out Congress’s laws; he also said Obama violated separation of powers.