News

Court hears U.S. appeal of preliminary injunction that kept DACA program in place

Judges take case under submission, will issue written ruling at later date

A panel of U.S. appeals court judges appeared to give a cool reception Tuesday to a government lawyer who urged them to overturn a preliminary injunction by a federal judge in San Francisco that protected undocumented young immigrants from deportation.

Deputy Assistant U.S. Attorney General Hashim Mooppan sought to persuade the three judges of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that courts don't have the power to review last year's decision by the Trump administration to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, known as DACA.

The preliminary injunction was issued in response to five lawsuits, including one filed by Santa Clara County together with the Service Employees International Union.

Mooppan contended that closing the program was within the discretion of the executive branch, outside the purview of the courts.

"Rescinding DACA was a discretionary enforcement decision," he told the court.

But Judges Kim Wardlaw and Jacqueline Nguyen questioned him closely about why the court shouldn't be able to review the action, while the third judge, John Owens, indicated he was concerned about whether the action violated the constitutional guarantee of equal treatment.

Nguyen also asked how much the court should take into account that DACA recipients have been relying on the program for more than five years.

"You've got thousands of people who have built their lives around the benefits conferred by this program," she said.

The panel took the case under submission after hearing an hour and 15 minutes of arguments in its Pasadena courtroom. It will issue a written ruling at a later date.

DACA, established by President Barack Obama in 2012, has enabled nearly 700,000 undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United States as children to apply for renewable two-year work permits and postponements of deportation.

The government is appealing a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District William Alsup of San Francisco in January. It requires the government to continue granting renewals for existing DACA recipients but does not require acceptance of new applications.

Alsup ruled in five lawsuits filed in federal court in San Francisco and San Jose to challenge the cancellation of DACA. They were filed by the University of California; the state of California and three other states; the city of San Jose; six individuals; and Santa Clara County, together with the Service Employees International Union.

At least five other lawsuits were filed in other courts around the country after the Trump administration announced in September it would phase out DACA beginning in March.

Alsup's preliminary injunction is the first to go before a federal appeals court.

Another federal trial judge in Brooklyn, New York, issued a similar nationwide preliminary injunction in February in a lawsuit filed by 16 states led by New York.

Arguments in that case are expected to be heard by the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this summer.

Conflicting rulings by the various courts would increase the likelihood that the Supreme Court will eventually decide the dispute.

In the meantime, if one injunction is upheld at the circuit level, it will remain in force nationwide even if the other one is not affirmed, according to lawyers for the University of California.

— Bay City News Service

Comments

1 person likes this
Posted by Citizen
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on May 21, 2018 at 6:25 am

Congress......pass a workable law or laws. Presidential Executive Orders are a great way to go around Congress. Get to,work, house and senate, time is running out, and the courts, shouldn't be saving your butt! Once again, Obama.......or Emperor Obama, made this mess. Trump fixing it, not!


Like this comment
Posted by MadAsHell
a resident of another community
on Jul 12, 2018 at 9:47 am

Why no ruling on this yeT?
Because the 9th Kangaroo Court know the injunction, and the lawsuit, is bull BUT
If it rules against the injunction DACA crumbles and
If it rules for the injunction it allows the case to move to the Supreme court where it will be struck down.
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM at its worst!


Like this comment
Posted by VA CA news
a resident of Las Lomitas School
on Jul 12, 2018 at 11:42 am

I know!!!! It's like the Crazy politicians and their promises!!!!

Where is the check from Mexico for our Great Wall on the border?!?!?!!

Drain the swamp!!

Next thing you know, the crazy politicians will promise us a blueprint in 2 weeks for lowering drug prices!!!!

Well, on May 11th, they said two weeks!!!! Why no blueprint yeT?

yeT!!!!!


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Global Warming Diet
By Laura Stec | 6 comments | 1,371 views

Couples: "Taming Your Gremlin" by Richard Carson
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,270 views

Preparing for kindergarten
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 719 views

Let's Talk Internships
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 305 views

 

Race is tomorrow!

On Friday, September 21, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run, or—for the first time—half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

Learn More