District Court Faces Jurisdiction Question in DACA Suits
U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis ordered briefs Tuesday to address the district court's jurisdiction over a pair of conjoined suits…
October 25, 2017 at 04:29 PM
3 minute read
New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. Photo credit: Rick Kopstein |
U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis ordered briefs Tuesday to address the district court's jurisdiction over a pair of conjoined suits challenging the Trump administration's plans to end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
Garaufis' order came shortly after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in In re Duke, No. 17-3345, extended a stay on a writ of mandamus petition filed by the government. The appellant-defendants argued that the district court orders refusing to stay discovery and requiring the filing of a privilege log over potential documents in the case “were immediate and irreparable,” requiring a stay ahead of the writ filing.
The district court does not have authority to review a “discretionary policy determination” made by the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Elaine Duke. That ability is barred under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Immigration and Nationality Act, which the government contends gives it the power to implement—or rescind—DACA.
“The district court has veered sharply from this well-marked path,” the government argued in its petition.
What Garaufis and Magistrate Judge James Orenstein are asking for in New York v. Trump, No. 17-cv-05228, and Vidal v. Baran, No. 16-cv-04756, is “extraordinarily burdensome and intrusive discovery as plaintiffs hunt for subjective motivations behind the challenged administrative action,” the defendants stated.
Ahead of any other action, the district court needed to address the “threshold legal issue[]” of its jurisdiction, the government urged. The district court's current approach “would threaten the separation of powers and make standard a manner of litigation that is both unduly intrusive and practically impossible for the government.”
“Only if the court were somehow to conclude that those threshold bars are inapplicable could the court properly even undertake to consider whether the Acting Secretary's decision was arbitrary and capricious, including with respect to the administrative record submitted to support that decision,” defendants argued.
The panel of Circuit Judges Dennis Jacobs, Robert Sack, and Barrington Parker ordered Tuesday that the district court consider and decide “expeditiously” this issue of “jurisdiction and justiciability.”
In his order immediately after, Garaufis directed defendants to file a supplemental brief “explaining why the court lacks jurisdiction” by Friday at noon. Plaintiffs are to file opposition briefs no later than Nov. 1 at noon.
“We look forward to addressing the merits of our claim in federal court, as we continue to pursue our case to protect DACA grantees and NY's best interests,” Amy Spitalnick, a spokeswoman for New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, said in a statement.
A Justice Department representative was not immediately available for comment.
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 AllLegal Issues to Watch in the US Appeals Courts in 2025
Second Circuit Upholds $5M Judgment Against Trump in E. Jean Carroll Case
4 minute readTies Go in Favor of Voters: NY Court of Appeals Upholds 2021 Canvassing Law
Trending Stories
- 1Restoring Trust in the Courts Starts in New York
- 2'Pull Back the Curtain': Ex-NFL Players Seek Discovery in Lawsuit Over League's Disability Plan
- 3Tensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
- 4Improper Removal to Fed. Court Leads to $100K Bill for Blue Cross Blue Shield
- 5Michael Halpern, Beloved Key West Attorney, Dies at 72
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