https://thehill.com/latino/444239-appea ... s-unlawfulA split federal appeals court on Friday ruled that President Trump’s decision to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program was unlawful because “it was not adequately explained."
The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia found that the administration's termination of the program was "arbitrary and capricious," in line with a prior ruling from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
The ruling comes as the legal battle over the termination of DACA continues. The Supreme Court is weighing whether to hear several cases over the end of the program.
The appeals court decision stems from a lawsuit arguing that the decision to end DACA needed to undergo public comment and other procedures required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
The complaint also alleged that the proposed policy changes on how the personal information of DACA applicants would be shared were similarly lawful, and violated due process protections guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
Attorneys for the Trump administration argued that the decision to rescind DACA was an agency decision, and therefore did not have to be made available for public comment.
But the court disagreed, finding that then-Acting Homeland Security Secretary Elaine Duke “rescinded a general enforcement policy in existence for over five years and affecting hundreds of thousands of enrollees based on the view that the policy was unlawful.”
And the court found that while the administration argued that DACA was unlawful in its decision to end the program, the documents used to back up those claims did not “identify any statutory provision with which the DACA policy conflicts.”
The judges noted that then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions wrote in a memo that courts had ruled against the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) program, which was similar to DACA and partly expanded the protections for children.
But they said that DACA and DAPA are still two separate programs, and the court rulings on one program cannot be used to argue for the elimination of another.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-lab ... -cir-rulesThe Trump administration’s decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program was illegal because it wasn’t adequately explained, a split federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., ruled.
The May 17 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturns a lower court’s determination that the administration hadn’t done anything wrong either in ending DACA or in the way it went about doing it. The Department of Homeland Security didn’t adequately explain its rationale for ending the Obama-era program, the appeals court said in a 2-1 decision.
The Fourth Circuit joins the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco in finding that the decision to end DACA was unlawful. The current lack of a split among the federal appeals courts decreases the chance that the U.S. Supreme Court will take up the issue. In November, the administration appealed the Ninth Circuit decision to the Supreme Court, as well as two cases pending before the Second and District of Columbia circuits.
The justices haven’t said one way or another what they will do with the cases.
Didn’t Explain Shift
“The point is that the Department had before it at the time it rescinded DACA a reasoned analysis from the office tasked with providing legal advice to all executive branch agencies that supported the policy’s legality,” Judge Albert Diaz wrote for the majority. “Yet the Department changed course without any explanation for why that analysis was faulty.”
The Fourth Circuit said the DHS wasn’t required to provide public notice and an opportunity to comment before ending DACA. It also wasn’t required to adhere to a 2012 policy preventing the sharing of information about DACA applicants for immigration enforcement purposes.
Judge Robert B. King joined the majority decision.
Judge Julius N. Richardson dissented, arguing that the court doesn’t have power to review the administration’s decisions with respect to DACA. He agreed, however, with the majority’s finding that the DHS can change its information sharing policies.
Give a chance Trump’s Administration will try again in East Texas Court so it can go through the Fifth Circuit Court and get a ruling they like. Still this will go to the SCOTUS where the ruling will be anybody’s guess.