Immigration and Citizenship

RELEASE: Trump Administration Tries to Convince SCOTUS to Take Responsibility for Catastrophic Consequences of Rescinding DACA

“If President Trump wants to make the choice to destroy lives, as Justice Sotomayor put it, he needs to own that decision and take public responsibility for it.” — CAC Chief counsel Brianne Gorod

WASHINGTON – Following oral argument over the future of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy at the Supreme Court, which Constitutional Accountability Center Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod attended, Gorod issued the following reaction:

It’s stunning how little time this morning the Administration’s lawyer spent defending the proposition that DACA is unlawful—presumably because that argument is so difficult to make, given the broad discretion Congress has long conferred on the executive branch to make these types of enforcement decisions. Instead the Administration’s lawyer kept insisting that the Administration’s decision also rested on other grounds. But as multiple justices pointed out, it is bedrock law that the courts review the reasons that the agency gave when it acted, not reasons it gave after the fact. It’s telling that the Solicitor General doesn’t seem to want that here.

In addition, Justice Sotomayor powerfully brought home the stakes of the Trump Administration’s decision to terminate DACA, observing that it would “destroy lives.”  The President told the public that the law requires him to make that choice, but that’s wrong, and the Court shouldn’t do the President’s dirty work for him. If the President wants to make the choice to destroy lives, as Justice Sotomayor put it, he needs to own that decision and take public responsibility for it.

#

Resources:

CAC case page, featuring brief on behalf of 172 current members and bipartisan former members of Congress, in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/department-of-homeland-security-v-regents-of-the-university-of-california-trump-v-naacp-and-mcaleenan-v-vidal/

SCOTUSblog symposium: “The DACA cases may be the next big test for the Roberts Court,” Brianne Gorod and Dayna Zolle, September 11, 2019: https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/09/symposium-the-daca-cases-may-be-the-next-big-test-for-the-roberts-court/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Immigration and Citizenship

Immigration and Citizenship
June 18, 2020

#SCOTUS DACA Ruling: A Tremendous Victory!

CAC’s Appellate Counsel Dayna Zolle discusses today’s #SCOTUS decision that the Trump Administration’s attempt to...
By: Dayna Zolle
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Padilla Raudales v. Decker

In Padilla Raudales v. Decker, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is considering whether the government may incarcerate someone without bail during deportation proceedings without showing that the person would likely abscond or...
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Ryan v. ICE

In Ryan v. ICE, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit is deciding whether U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers may make civil immigration arrests in and around courthouses.
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Pereira Brito v. Barr

In Pereira Brito v. Barr, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit is considering whether the government may incarcerate someone without bail during deportation proceedings without showing that the person would likely abscond or...
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

New York v. Barr

In New York v. Barr, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is considering whether the court should rehear en banc a case about whether the United States Attorney General can impose...
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

City of Evanston v. Barr

In Evanston v. Barr, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is considering whether the United States Attorney General can impose funding conditions on local jurisdictions that receive certain federal funding in...