Trump Looks to Fast-Track DACA Appeal to Supreme Court
The Justice Department announced Tuesday it would both appeal a California federal judge's ruling from last week and seek direct review from the U.S. Supreme Court.
January 16, 2018 at 02:58 PM
3 minute read
The Department of Justice plans to ask the U.S. Supreme Court this week to weigh in on its rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, bypassing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Last week, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California temporarily blocked the Trump administration's rescission of the DACA policy. The DOJ filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit in that case Tuesday, but U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement the DOJ also wants the Supreme Court to rule on the merits of the case. He said it “defies both law and common sense” that a “single district court in San Francisco” could order the reinstallation of the DACA program.
“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,” Sessions said.
The plaintiffs in the consolidated cases, who include the University of California system, are represented by a team of lawyers from Covington & Burling as well as Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, among others.
The DOJ and President Donald Trump lambasted Alsup last week for his decision. Alsup's ruling follows several others that have been unfavorable to the Trump administration in the Northern California court and the Ninth Circuit, including decisions upholding injunctions against the third iteration of the travel ban executive order and the sanctuary cities executive order.
“It just shows everyone how broken and unfair our Court System is when the opposing side in a case (such as DACA) always runs to the 9th Circuit and almost always wins before being reversed by higher courts,” the president tweeted last week.
Sessions announced in September last year that the administration would rescind the DACA policy on the grounds it was illegal to begin with. He cited the Supreme Court's 4-4 split in 2016 on the issue, which left in place a Fifth Circuit ruling against a similar program for immigrant parents and an expansion of the DACA program.
Several lawsuits have been filed in multiple courts over the action ever since the administration's announcement. In addition to the cases in California, a similar set of related suits are pending at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. DOJ has filed an appeal with the Second Circuit in that case on whether the decision to rescind DACA qualifies as agency discretion.
Steven Goldblatt, faculty director of the Supreme Court Institute at Georgetown University Law Center, said the high court has only skipped appellate review a “handful” of times in the last century.
“[The government] is going to have to articulate to the court that there's an urgency to having the court decide it that warrants accelerating the process and eliminating the court of appeals,” he said.
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
© 2025 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 AllElevate Acquires Intellectual Property Research Provider Sagacious IP
3 minute readAs Nonprofits Plead for Answers, Dem AGs Plan Suit to Block Trump Funding Freeze
4 minute readArentFox Schiff Adds Global Complex Litigation Partner in Los Angeles
Trending Stories
- 1Bill Would Consolidate Antitrust Enforcement Under DOJ
- 2Cornell Tech Expands Law, Technology and Entrepreneurship Masters of Law Program to Part Time Format
- 3Divided Eighth Circuit Sides With GE's Timely Removal of Indemnification Action to Federal Court
- 4Former U.S. Dept. of Education Attorney Suspended for Failure to Complete CLE Credits
- 5ArentFox Schiff Adds Global Complex Litigation Partner in Los Angeles
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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