Thursday, June 18, 2020

Responses to Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California


The Supreme Court's decision in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California is in the books.

President Trump was not pleased with the decision and called for "New Justices":



Even more aggressive responses came from high level immigration officials and focused on the alleged unlawfulness of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy:

Acting Secretary Chad Wolf:

“DACA recipients deserve closure and finality surrounding their status here in the U.S. Unfortunately, today’s Supreme Court decision fails to provide that certainty. The DACA program was created out of thin air and implemented illegally. The American people deserve to have the Nation’s laws faithfully executed as written by their representatives in Congress—not based on the arbitrary decisions of a past Administration. This ruling usurps the clear authority of the Executive Branch to end unlawful programs.”

Acting Deputy Secretary Ken Cuccinelli:

“The Supreme Court’s decision is an affront to the rule of law and gives Presidents power to extend discretionary policies into future Administrations. No Justice will say that the DACA program is lawful, and that should be enough reason to end it. Justice Clarence Thomas had it right in dissent: ‘Such timidity [by SCOTUS] forsakes the Court’s duty to apply the law according to neutral principles and the ripple effects of the majority’s error will be felt throughout our system of self-government.’”

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Deputy Director for Policy Joseph Edlow issued the following statement on the Supreme Court decision:

“Today’s court opinion has no basis in law and merely delays the President’s lawful ability to end the illegal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals amnesty program. 

“DACA was created through an Executive Branch memorandum after President Obama said repeatedly that it was illegal for him to do so unilaterally and despite the fact that Congress affirmatively rejected the proposal on multiple occasions. The constitutionality of this de facto amnesty program created by the Obama administration has been widely questioned since its inception. The fact remains that under DACA, hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens continue to remain in our country in violation of the laws passed by Congress and to take jobs Americans need now more than ever. Ultimately, DACA is not a long-term solution for anyone, and if Congress wants to provide a permanent solution for these illegal aliens it needs to step in to reform our immigration laws and prove that the cornerstone of our democracy is that presidents cannot legislate with a ‘pen and a phone.’”

Not surprisingly, there was much praise from immigrant rights advocates.

The Penn State Law Center for Immigrants' Rights Law Clinic released a Fact Sheet on the DACA decision.

Peter Margulies on Lawfare, Amy Howe on SCOTUSBlog, and Shoba Sivaprasad Wadia on Medium offer sober analysis of the four corners of the Supreme Court's decision.


Current Affairs | Permalink


Post a comment