• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Geist

Prophet of Truth
Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
4,580
http://wapo.st/2B7fGYI
The Justice Department on Tuesday said it would take the "rare step" of asking the Supreme Court to clear the way for the Trump administration to dismantle a federal program that provides work permits to undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States since childhood.

The Department of Justice said it filed a notice of appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit seeking to overturn a California judge's ruling that the government could not dismantle the Obama-era program while a legal challenge to the decision to end the program is pending.

The Trump administration said later this week it will petition the Supreme Court to intervene in the case, hoping to bypass the 9th circuit altogether in its bid to phase out the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in March.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said "it defies both law and common sense" that a "single district court in San Francisco" had halted the administration's plans.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco issued a temporary injunction last week halting the Trump administration's dismantling of the program while a legal challenge to that decision is pending. He ordered the government to resume renewing DACA and work authorizations for the 690,000 immigrants who held that status when the Trump administration ended the program on Sept. 5.

Alsup's ruling said California and other plaintiffs had shown they were likely to succeed on their claims that the Trump administration's revocation of the nearly six-year-old program was "capricious" and not in compliance with federal laws. He said states, immigrants and public universities faced significant losses if a court found that the administration had acted improperly in terminating the program.

So much for "let Congress take care of it."
 

djplaeskool

Member
Oct 26, 2017
19,792
So much for "let Congress take care of it."

To be fair, Congress was tasked with actually passing a law.
DREAM Act needs to happen, but a certain someone doesn't seem interested in following through with signing 'whatever comes to his desk'.

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm assuming this means Trump can't end DACA with an executive order?

No, there needs to be a full scale plan in place, as the court deemed setting up hundreds of thousands of people to instantly lose protected status and make subject to deportation as "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion".
 
Last edited:

Username1198

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
8,128
Space, Man
Tax dodging, racist, lazy dumb fuck of a human infidel. We are WAY more American then him or anyone in his administration.

The history books will massacre these fucks bigly beleive me.
 

Deleted member 3208

Oct 25, 2017
11,934
You would think that Latinos killed Trump and Session's beloved ones by the hate those two have toward us.

Completely disgusting.
 

Greyham

Member
Dec 15, 2017
95
"We care about everyone, they don't"

Seriously, time to start chanting this to the high heavens.
 

Netherscourge

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,960
Doesn't seem like they have any interest in a DACA deal if they're in that big of a hurry to end it.

They never had any interest. It was only leverage for wall funding.

Now that Trump personally screwed up the whole thing with his racist comments, he's just bailing out altogether.

He'll push for another partisan vote to get his way. Expect a lot of shit to be rushed through congress this year before the mid-terms.
 

cameron

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
23,835


DoJ statement: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/just...tends-petition-immediate-supreme-court-review

Justice Department Files Notice to Appeal and Intends to Petition for Immediate Supreme Court Review in DACA Lawsuit

The Department of Justice today filed a notice of appeal in The Regents of the University of California and Janet Napolitano v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Elaine Duke seeking review before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Department also intends later this week to take the rare step of filing a petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment, seeking direct review in the Supreme Court.

"It defies both law and common sense for DACA—an entirely discretionary non-enforcement policy that was implemented unilaterally by the last administration after Congress rejected similar legislative proposals and courts invalidated the similar DAPA policy—to somehow be mandated nationwide by a single district court in San Francisco," said Attorney General Jeff Sessions. "It is clear that Acting Secretary Duke acted within her discretion to rescind this policy with an orderly wind down. This was done both to give Congress an opportunity to act on this issue and in light of ongoing litigation in which the injunction against DAPA had already been affirmed by the Supreme Court. We are now taking the rare step of requesting direct review on the merits of this injunction by the Supreme Court so that this issue may be resolved quickly and fairly for all the parties involved."

 

cameron

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
23,835
Chris Geidner @chrisgeidner

A question now is whether DOJ is going to make a generalized request for cert before judgment because of the importance of the case — or take direct aim at the 9th Circuit in its cert petition.


Chris Geidner @chrisgeidner

The problem with making a generalized request is that it would be easy for the court to just push it back to the 9th Circuit, telling DOJ the justices want further development of the issues before they take it on.
Chris Geidner @chrisgeidner

Obviously, the other side, taking direct aim at the 9th Circuit would be highly unusual — and not something that I see the Chief Justice or Kennedy (at the least) appreciating.
 

BriGuy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,275
Should I be hopeful in the SC doing the right thing, or is this another "in a 5 to 4 ruling..." shitfests on the horizon.