WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday dealt a setback to PresidentDonald Trump, requiring his administration to maintain protections he hassought to end for hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought illegallyinto the United States as children.
The justices refused to hear the administration’s appeal of a federaljudge’s Jan. 9 nationwide injunction that halted Trump’s move to rescind aprogram that benefits immigrants known as “Dreamers” implemented in 2012 byhis Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama.
The protections were due to start phasing out beginning in March under theRepublican president’s action, announced in September.
Under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, roughly700,000 young adult, mostly Hispanics, are protected from deportation andgiven work permits for two-year periods, after which they must re-apply.Congress so far has failed to pass legislation to address the fate of the“Dreamers,” including a potential path to citizenship.
San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled last month thatDACA must remain in place while litigation over the legality of Trump’saction is resolved, prompting the administration’s unusual appeal bypassinga federal appeals court and going directly to the Supreme Court.
“The DACA program — which provides work permits and myriad governmentbenefits to illegal immigrants en masse — is clearly unlawful. The districtjudge’s decision to unilaterally re-impose a program that Congress hadexplicitly and repeatedly rejected is a usurpation of legislativeauthority,” White House spokesman Raj Shah said.
“We look forward to having this case expeditiously heard by the appealscourt and, if necessary, the Supreme Court, where we fully expect toprevail,” Shah added.
The administration argued that Obama exceeded his powers under theConstitution when he bypassed Congress and created DACA.
Alsup ruled that the challengers, including the states of California,Maine, Maryland and Minnesota and Obama’s former homeland securitysecretary Janet Napolitano, were likely to succeed in arguing that theadministration’s decision to end DACA was arbitrary.
In a brief order, the Supreme Court justices did not explain theirreasoning, but said the appeal was “denied without prejudice,” indicatingthey will maintain an open mind on the underlying legal issue still beingconsidered by a lower court, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Courtof Appeals. The high court also said it expects the lower court to “proceedexpeditiously to decide this case.”
‘FULLY LEGAL’
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, called theadministration’s bid to bypass the 9th Circuit, which has ruled againstTrump on other matters, “unusual and unnecessary.”
“We look forward to explaining to the Ninth Circuit court that DACA isfully legal. For the sake of the Dreamers who help make our economy and ourstate strong, the rescission of DACA should not be allowed to stand,”Becerra said in a statement.
The DACA dispute is the latest major case brought to the Supreme Court forits consideration arising from Trump’s immigration policies. The justicesare due to hear arguments in April on the legality of his latest travel banorder barring entry to people from several Muslim-majority nations.
Greisa Martinez, a DACA recipient who works in Washington with theimmigrants’ rights group United We Dream, said she was grateful the SupremeCourt’s action gave people already enrolled in the program more time, butsaid most young immigrants who are eligible for the protections have notsigned up.
“We need a permanent solution now,” Martinez told reporters. “This back andforth on DACA and the legislative process has created a crisis in ourcommunity.”
Justice Department spokesman Devin O‘Malley said in a statement that “whilewe were hopeful for a different outcome,” the high court rarely agrees totake up cases before a lower court has ruled, “though in our view it waswarranted for the extraordinary injunction requiring the Department ofHomeland Security to maintain DACA.”
Trump’s move to rescind DACA prompted legal challenges by Democratic stateattorneys general and various organizations and individuals in multiplefederal courts.
On Feb. 13, a second U.S. judge issued a similar injunction ordering theadministration to keep DACA in place. U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufisin Brooklyn acted in a lawsuit brought by plaintiffs including a group ofstates led by New York. – Agencies