SCOTUS To Begin Hearing Arguments Over DACA Program This Week

[jimnyc]

SCOTUS To Begin Hearing Arguments Over DACA Program This Week

The Supreme Court is set to begin hearing arguments over the legality of the Deferred Actions for Childhood Arrivals or DACA program. The Obama administration enacted DACA via executive order in 2012. They called it a stop-gap measure to shield migrants brought to the U.S as children from deportation.

“This is not immunity. This is not a path to citizenship. It’s not a permanent fix. This is a temporary stop-gap measure that lets us focus our resources wisely while giving a degree of relief and hope to talented, driven, patriotic young people.”

— former President Barack Obama

The Trump administration moved to outlaw the program in 2017, but was forced to temporarily reinstate it after three lower courts argued it was terminated unlawfully. Though no new applicants can apply, the program remains in effect for those were already accepted over seven years later.

In June of 2019, the Supreme Court finally agreed to combine all three appeals cases into one ruling. Justices will be debating two questions: whether the government’s move to end DACA is something that lower courts can review at all and, if so, was the decision to end DACA legal? Should the court decide the administration acted lawfully, DACA recipients would likely be able maintain their protected status until their two year contract expires. After that, they would be subject to deportation.

“There will be 700,000 young people, who I think would be allowed to finish whatever their term on DACA is, but once their terms are finished, they won’t be allowed to renew. They’ll be subject to deportation. They won’t have work authorization.”

— Janet Napolitano, former Department of Homeland Security secretary

If DACA is struck down, President Trump has indicated he will allow Democrats to negotiate to maintain parts of the program likely in exchange for their support on his hardline immigration agenda.

https://www.oann.com/scotus-to-begin...ram-this-week/

[STTAB]

SCOTUS To Begin Hearing Arguments Over DACA Program This Week

The Supreme Court is set to begin hearing arguments over the legality of the Deferred Actions for Childhood Arrivals or DACA program. The Obama administration enacted DACA via executive order in 2012. They called it a stop-gap measure to shield migrants brought to the U.S as children from deportation.



The Trump administration moved to outlaw the program in 2017, but was forced to temporarily reinstate it after three lower courts argued it was terminated unlawfully. Though no new applicants can apply, the program remains in effect for those were already accepted over seven years later.

In June of 2019, the Supreme Court finally agreed to combine all three appeals cases into one ruling. Justices will be debating two questions: whether the government’s move to end DACA is something that lower courts can review at all and, if so, was the decision to end DACA legal? Should the court decide the administration acted lawfully, DACA recipients would likely be able maintain their protected status until their two year contract expires. After that, they would be subject to deportation.



If DACA is struck down, President Trump has indicated he will allow Democrats to negotiate to maintain parts of the program likely in exchange for their support on his hardline immigration agenda.

https://www.oann.com/scotus-to-begin...ram-this-week/

DACA doesn't need to be struck down , what I would like to see the Court address directly is if one President can create such a program with executive order, how is that another President can't cancel such a program via executive order. That would be a much better ruling, not just specific to this one program , but over reaching. It would actually take a LOT of power away from the Executive branch, since they would no longer be able to create programs out of thin air expecting that they could never be cancelled.

[del]

DACA doesn't need to be struck down , what I would like to see the Court address directly is if one President can create such a program with executive order, how is that another President can't cancel such a program via executive order. That would be a much better ruling, not just specific to this one program , but over reaching. It would actually take a LOT of power away from the Executive branch, since they would no longer be able to create programs out of thin air expecting that they could never be cancelled.

If Trump wasn't such a lazy coward, that's what he would have done.

Instead, he decided that he could have his cake and eat it too by going along with the wingnut brigade and declare it illegal on the well known legal principle of "Because I said so."

Now it's come around to bite him in his more than ample hindquarters, and the usual suspects are blaming everyone but the *man* who is responsible.

He didn't want to take responsibility for it because he knows it will cost him votes. Far easier to have his pet AG declare it unconstitutional and not take the risk.

BTW, it's already an established point of law that existing EOs can be rescinded by future presidents.

[Abbey Marie]

Let the Dems say you can’t vacate a prior executive order. It will help us when Trump’s orders are attacked in the future.

[STTAB]

Let the Dems say you can’t vacate a prior executive order. It will help us when Trump’s orders are attacked in the future.

Sorry, but EOs are not meant to be used in such a manner. Even Lincoln KNEW his Emancipation Proclamation was almost certainly illegal in that it totally reached beyond his authority.

Now, I can't really think of any Trump

Congress is supposed to be the legislative branch, not the President, this includes Trump.

[STTAB]

If Trump wasn't such a lazy coward, that's what he would have done.

Instead, he decided that he could have his cake and eat it too by going along with the wingnut brigade and declare it illegal on the well known legal principle of "Because I said so."

Now it's come around to bite him in his more than ample hindquarters, and the usual suspects are blaming everyone but the *man* who is responsible.

He didn't want to take responsibility for it because he knows it will cost him votes. Far easier to have his pet AG declare it unconstitutional and not take the risk.

BTW, it's already an established point of law that existing EOs can be rescinded by future presidents.

I'm not sure what being a lazy coward has to do with anything, however what Trump did was in affect cancel the DACA program. He may not have used the words "this program is cancelled" but the net effect was the same. That he didn't simply starting rounding up DACA enrolls and deporting them immediately says something.