Will the courts decide the Syrian refugee resettlement question?

It was amazing how quickly Republican governors came together on question of resettling Syrian refugees. It took only one day to get 25 states on board. While practically everyone on cable news and social media agrees that refugee resettlement is a federal prerogative only Jim Geraghty at National Review Online has researched the law. Granted Geraghty is a writer, not a lawyer, but the text of the The Refugee Act of 1980 makes it clear that the states do have a significant roll.

(2)(A) The Director and the Federal agency administering subsection (b)(1), shall consult regularly (not less often than quarterly) with State and local governments and private nonprofit voluntary agencies concerning the sponsorship process and the intended distribution of refugees among the States and localities before their placement in those States and localities.
(B) The Director shall develop and implement, in consultation with representatives of voluntary agencies and State and local governments, policies and strategies for the placement and resettlement of refugees within the United States.
(C) Such policies and strategies, to the extent practicable and except under such unusual circumstances as the Director may recognize, shall-
(i) insure that a refugee is not initially placed or resettled in an area highly impacted (as determined under regulations prescribed by the Director after consultation with such agencies and governments) by the presence of refugees or comparable populations unless the refugee has a spouse, parent, sibling, son, or daughter residing in that area,
(ii) provide for a mechanism whereby representatives of local affiliates of voluntary agencies regularly (not less often than quarterly) meet with representatives of State and local governments to plan and coordinate in advance of their arrival the appropriate placement of refugees among the various States and localities, and
(iii) take into account- (I) the proportion of refugees and comparable entrants in the population in the area, (II) the availability of employment opportunities, affordable housing, and public and private resources (including educational, health care, and mental health services) for refugees in the area, (III) the likelihood of refugees placed in the area becoming self-sufficient and free from long-term dependence on public assistance, and (IV) the secondary migration of refugees to and from the area that is likely to occur.

Then the kicker.

“With respect to the location of placement of refugees within a State, the Federal agency administering subsection (b)(1) shall, consistent with such policies and strategies and to the maximum extent possible, take into account recommendations of the State.”

Of course that is subject to legal interpretation and that's what federal courts are for. If a restraining order can stall or possibly shut down Obama's illegal amnesty program it would seem that a suit filed by the states could also stymie this latest abuse of executive power.