Posted on 06/25/2019 1:38:39 PM PDT by Monrose72
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court in the coming days will have a last chance before its three-month summer break to decide whether to take up President Donald Trump’s long-stalled bid to end a program that shields from deportation hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the country illegally as children. The Trump administration on Nov. 5 asked the conservative-majority court to throw out three lower court rulings that blocked the Republican president’s 2017 plan to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program implemented in 2012 by his Democratic predecessor Barack Obama.
I
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
DACA was never legal.
But then again, neither was the usurper who invented it......
Liberals care about the ‘children of illegals’ because they murdered their own babies in the womb... so this is their way of showing the world how much they ‘care’...
This should be a no brainer , legally speaking.
A president issues an executive order, and then the next president reverses that executive order.
How can the courts intervene, when it comes to executive orders??? How does it violates any laws, if a president rescinds a previous executive order?
Regents of the University of California v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security : "To be clear: we do not hold that DACA could not be rescinded as an exercise of Executive Branch discretion. We hold only that here, where the Executive did not make a discretionary choice to end DACA—but rather acted based on an erroneous view of what the law required—the rescission was arbitrary and capricious under settled law. The government is, as always, free to reexamine its policy choices"
Napolitano v DHS: "All agree that a new administration is entitled to replace old policies with new policies [...] the new administration didn’t terminate DACA on policy grounds. It terminated DACA over a point of law, a pithy conclusion that the agency had exceeded its statutory and constitutional authority."
Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen: "Defendants indisputably can end the DACA program. [...] The question before the court is thus not whether Defendants could end the DACA program, but whether they offered legally adequate reasons for doing so. Based on its review of the record before it, the court concludes that Defendants have not done so. First, the decision to end the DACA program appears to rest exclusively on a legal conclusion that the program was unconstitutional and violated the APA and INA."
NAACP v. Trump: "while immigration policies are generally “so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference,” there are good reasons to scrutinize a policy more carefully when it is based solely on an agency’s reading of domestic statutory law."
IIRC, it wasn’t an executive order. It was a memo to Jeh Johnson, DHS Secretary.
This should be a no brainer , legally speaking.
Just hope the Supremes actually follow the law.
If the SCOTUS does not take up this case, they are sending a clear political message that they will not protect the constitutional powers of this POTUS. Then the corruption of the courts is complete and they no longer have any legitimacy.
Good law passed.
Ignored/not enforced at all.
Predictable secondary problems/crises develop.
Agencies sue/fight/infight and it goes up the chain of the corrupt judiciary.
Dirtbag Supremes enable by ruling on cases that should never have been cases at all.
America is run by nine corrupt oligarchs.
I'm sick of old, old laws that should solve problems at the outset, being ignored, creating crises that are ultimately going to bring the country to CW2.
If you don't think the next election flipping to a few states because of illegals voting won't lead to CW2, then you haven't been paying attention.
Don’t know how many times it has to be said on here. It wasn’t an Executive Order!!! It was a memo to DHS about enforcement, or more accurately, non enforcement. A memo!
One of the functions of the judicial system is to convert "illegal" into "legal."
Even hallucination is sufficient basis to make this conversion. See abortion and homo marriage.
If a majority of SCOTUS wants open borders or immigration amnesty, then that's what it will order. The law has nothing to do with it.
Apparently a policy to end programs that were unconstitutional to begin with is not acceptable.
The three bracnhes of checks and balances all aim to gain power, and this happens only by taking power away from the states and the people. The three branches play fight amongst themselves while all claiming to be upholdiong the pronciples enshrined in the constitution.
Since it was never legal to begin with the only way the courts can sustain it is by judicial fiat. That is not their constitutional role. Congress on multiple times has taken up DACA AND REJECTED DACA. Time for the courts to get out of the way and say it is over, time to deport these illegal aliens and their illegal families. Every one of them should be immediately deported. Let them discuss the turmoil in their lives with their parents who put them in this situation. NOT OUR PROBLEM. Deport them all!!!
This needs our prayer.
Matter of fact, for all the groups we pray for here on FR, I rarely see the SCOTUS mentioned (although it’s more than possible that I am just missing seeing it) and it actually may be more critical than most people realize.
The question before the USSC is not whether DACA should remain in place, but whether the administration's briefly argued determination that DACA is unconstitutional is well founded. Four courts have stated that President Trump can end DACA as a policy decision.
Drop kick them back across the border. Stop all freebies. Fine employers.
It was never a law.
I’m not sure what there is to review
DACA was never legal.
Neither was gay marriage. What they will do is say it’s not legal and tell the President to make it legal.
They in the federal government are all very sanctimonious about maintaining balance in the three branches of government, but, guess what?
All three branches are constantly gaining power, at the expense of the people and their local governments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.