Led by Jenner & Block, Microsoft, Princeton Join Forces in DACA Fight
It's the most recent lawsuit against the Trump administration over the decision to end the DACA program.
November 03, 2017 at 05:10 PM
9 minute read
Microsoft and Princeton University teamed up to file a lawsuit Friday in federal court challenging the Trump administration's decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
The company and university, along with a current DACA recipient and Princeton student named Maria De La Cruz Perales Sanchez, are represented by Jenner & Block partner Tom Perrelli, who served as associate attorney general during President Barack Obama's first term. While the business community has largely come out in support of other lawsuits challenging the decision, Microsoft appears to be the first corporation to bring its own challenge against the Sept. 5 announcement. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
“The termination of the DACA program severely harms Perales Sanchez and other
Dreamers, as well as the employers and educational institutions that rely on and benefit from their contributions,” the complaint said.
In the complaint, Microsoft said it has a “significant interest” in retaining the DACA recipients it employs, because of the high cost of recruiting talented employees and the disruptive nature of “unanticipated” employee turnover. Princeton likewise said it has an interest in maintaining the DACA program because it has already invested resources in students that receive DACA benefits on the assumption they would be allowed to continue studying and working in the country.
“Because fostering a diversity of perspectives is crucial to Princeton's mission of teaching and research and to Microsoft's core business functions, these two institutions have invested in many initiatives to make their campus and workplaces more welcoming to people of all backgrounds. DACA recipients are no exception,” according to the complaint.
The lawsuit asks the court to issue an injunction barring the government from enforcing the rescission. It alleges violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as the Fifth Amendment's equal protection and due process clauses.
In an email, Justice Department spokesman Devin O'Malley said the government is eager to defend its decision.
“As the attorney general has said: 'No greater good can be done for the overall health and well-being of our Republic, than preserving and strengthening the impartial rule of law,'” O'Malley said. “While the plaintiffs in today's lawsuit may believe that an arbitrary circumvention of Congress is lawful, the Department of Justice looks forward to defending this administration's position.”
On Wednesday, Microsoft joined more than 100 other companies, including Uber Technologies Inc., Twitter Inc., Google and Facebook Inc., in filing an amicus brief in the University of California's challenge to the decision in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
In filing the lawsuit Friday, Microsoft followed through on its September promise to protect its employees affected by the decision. In a blog post that month, Brad Smith, Microsoft president and chief legal officer, wrote that if Congress did not act to protect the DACA program, “our company will exercise its legal rights properly to help protect our employees.”
The company and university, along with a current DACA recipient and Princeton student named Maria De La Cruz Perales Sanchez, are represented by
“The termination of the DACA program severely harms Perales Sanchez and other
Dreamers, as well as the employers and educational institutions that rely on and benefit from their contributions,” the complaint said.
In the complaint,
“Because fostering a diversity of perspectives is crucial to Princeton's mission of teaching and research and to
The lawsuit asks the court to issue an injunction barring the government from enforcing the rescission. It alleges violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as the Fifth Amendment's equal protection and due process clauses.
In an email, Justice Department spokesman Devin O'Malley said the government is eager to defend its decision.
“As the attorney general has said: 'No greater good can be done for the overall health and well-being of our Republic, than preserving and strengthening the impartial rule of law,'” O'Malley said. “While the plaintiffs in today's lawsuit may believe that an arbitrary circumvention of Congress is lawful, the Department of Justice looks forward to defending this administration's position.”
On Wednesday,
In filing the lawsuit Friday,
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Absurd Costs'?: Visa Faces Antitrust Class-Action Surge Following DOJ Complaint
3 minute read'Systemic and Pervasive'?: DiCello Levitt Alleges WWE Child Sexual Abuse Scandal
3 minute readThe 2024 NLJ Awards: Professional Excellence—Appellate Hot List
4th Circuit Revives Workplace Retaliation Lawsuit Against Biden's HHS Secretary
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250