Posted on 02/26/2018 6:40:20 AM PST by GIdget2004
The Supreme Court on Monday delivered a blow to the Trump administration by refusing to hear the government's challenge to a lower court ruling that has temporarily blocked the administration from winding down the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
The Department of Justice’s request was rare in that it asked the Supreme Court to jump ahead of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in reviewing the case.
The court typically will only bypass an appellate court when there’s an emergency involving foreign affairs, a serious separation of powers concerns or when it has already agreed to hear another case dealing with the same question.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Secondly he does indeed still have DACA to use as a bargaining chip, it has merely been delayed. However, he has every right to end an EO, and the courts can only delay it temporarily.
Agree with posters above; sounds like decision was procedural (jumping the 9th Circuit), not on merits of the case.
5th circuit says DACA is illegal. 9th circuit has a case pending. Don’t act in 9th, including illegal acts such as giving an unauthorized by law green card, which is an executive action, until highest court rules. Enforce legal rules in all other circuits. Only give illegal green cards on an individually ordered basis by a particular person in the program. Each action is an order to do an illegal act and treat is as such. Start a justice department investigation of the court, for conspiring to compel an illegal act under color of law.
DK
SCOTUS has original jurisdiction involving states suing DC.
Not sure, but suspect the case originated from a state.
That’s exactly what happened. The head of the civil division of our Department of Justice needs to be fired. The wasted all this time on an end run strategy to the Supremes KNOWING this was a potential outcome. These are some raging incompetents.
Pretty slanted/misleading headline and lede in that story. The Supreme Court did not refuse the Trump Administration’s challenge; they refused to change the sequence of events normally involved in a legal challenge.
“so DACA is Dead March 5 ?”
“That would probably be why they refused to hear it. It’s pretty much moot.”
The lower (District) level court ruled that Trump could NOT end DACA that quickly. The reasoning it had (with which I do NOT agree) was that even if the policy was unconstitutional, the fact that it had been implemented (under Obama) means that to get rid of it you have to go through certain procedures involving notice, etc.
The Trump Administration asked the Supreme Court to jump in ahead of the middle (Circuit - 9th Circus, in this case) level court, and to make a decision NOW. The 4 US Supreme Court Justices decided not to jump in ahead...thus meaning that the 9th Circus gets to decide, in its own time, whether the District Court was correct. If the 9th Circus decides against Trump, then it will be appealed to the Supremes...and I am VERY certain that they will take it. IOW, this decision is a procedural one - they did NOT rule on the merits of the case.
However, since the USSC will not take on the case right now, and it’ll take a while for the 9th Circus to get around to taking it and making a ruling (probably a year or so), the policy (DACA) will stay in place.
What I’d like to see is Trump ordering deportations ANYWAY - then let there be another case...which will take time to be decided, during which time there will be thousands of deportations. What’s the California District Court going to do, send an army to stop Trump? There’s no penalty, and no law-breaking, in the act of defying an order that backs an unconstitutional policy.
The GOP should have been in court the day after the Kenyanesian Usurper did this as the opposition party, but we don’t have an opposition party, they wanted amnesty too, any way they could get it, even illegally.
“””They cant. Trump has the worst legal advice on the planet.”””
Agreed........the DOJ has blown several cases
without prejudice means they can return....
Help me out here... if Obama’s executive order ends March 5th, then what type of ruling by some judge extends the initial order. My understanding is that Trump wanted to do away with the previous executive order, and that is what the judge ruled against. Where was it stated that the judge overruled Obama and created a new order that runs indefinitely. I can see the Supreme Court not wanting to get involved in something that was going to expire shortly anyhow.
Who the hell is running this country. The President or a bunch of sorry-a$$ liberal judges.
This country used to have a justice system, to day all that is left is a bunch of legalistic liberal a$$es that take their instructions from the Workers Daily.
Actually, the DOJ has been very successful in front of the Supremes.
This was just a procedural decision, NOT a decision on the substance of the matter (i.e. is DACA constitutional?). All that happened here is that the Supremes (well, 4 of them) decided NOT to go outside of normal judicial procedures, which are to have a District Court decision appealed to the Circuit Court, and only then to the Supremes. Nothing unusual about that at all - which doesn’t mean that I like this decision, but for some unknown reason they didn’t consult with me on it. :>)
Clickbait headline. The court will hear the challenge and uphold presidential authority over this issue when it is ready to hear it. The court may be a little busy to intervene in a issue that Trump has twisted to and fro and that may have a political solution impending. But mostly the court is busy with a huge decision on government employee unions.
No, short of some other intervention—DACA lives beyond March 5th.
Precisely. Obama wrote this EO creating DACA. Trump can end it the same way.
We left the Constitution and the rule of law behind on Usurpation Day January 20, 2009 when an ineligible man was allowed to usurp the office with the complete cooperation of BOTH parties.
Procedural issue. They don’t consider it urgent enough to jump over the appeals court. The time for Scotus will be after the Nutty Ninth denies the appeal.
That is what I’m reading. The Hill lying again?
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.