Trump Administration Set for Third Appeal Over DACA Suit to Head to Second Circuit
The latest request for interlocutory appeal the government is expected to file soon will join a previous request for the circuit court to review another motion to dismiss, as well as the current briefings occurring now over the nationwide injunction that's halted the wind-down of the immigration policy.
May 01, 2018 at 05:13 PM
3 minute read
The potential appeals are piling up at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in the battle over the Trump administration's wind-down of the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals immigration policy playing out in Brooklyn federal court.
Earlier this week U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis of the Eastern District of New York granted the Department of Justice's motion to certify for interlocutory appeal an earlier partial denial of the government's motion to dismiss by the court. In doing so, the government is poised to try and bring the number of appeals before the circuit court already out of the DACA action to three.
The most recent appealable instance hinged on the decision in March by Garaufis to allow the individual plaintiffs' equal protection claims to go forward in Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen, 16-cv-04756. As the judge's order notes, that claim relies heavily on President Donald Trump's statements on the campaign trail that the plaintiffs argue were derogatory toward Latinos generally and Mexican immigrants in particular.
The government argued that this presents a controlling question of the law that the Second Circuit should get to weigh in on. Garaufis agreed with the government, and noted that, were he to be required to disregard Trump's statements made before he became president, it would likely, but not certainly, result in the individual plaintiffs' equal protection claims being dismissed, since none of Trump's in-office statements have been alleged to be “comparably inflammatory and offensive.”
Garaufis goes on to note that other courts have taken other opinions on the issue. The Northern District of California, for example, in its DACA suit was in line with Garaufis' thinking on the issue when it ruled to allow that suit, filed by the state's university system, to go forward. He contrasted that with a recent Maryland federal court decision, which sided with the government in dismissing the suit brought by so-called Dreamers, which included equal protection concerns similarly predicated on Trump's rhetoric on the campaign trail.
However, since orders, not issues, are appealable, the full scope of the motion and order denying the government's motion to dismiss is up for review by the Second Circuit, should it grant the government's interlocutory appeal.
Before this week, the government already had one appeal at the circuit, over Garaufis granting a nationwide preliminary injunction over the government's planned recession of the DACA program, which doubled up on a similar injunction already in place in the matter before the Northern District of California. Briefings are currently underway in this matter before the Second Circuit.
Additionally, the government has a motion for interlocutory appeal pending before the circuit over Garaufis' earlier denial of the government's motion to dismiss on subject-matter jurisdiction.
A DOJ representative did not respond to a request for comment on Garaufis' order.
A representative at the National Immigration Law Center, which is representing the Batalla Vidal plaintiffs, did not respond to a request 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 AllNew York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
Bankruptcy Judge Clears Path for Recovery in High-Profile Crypto Failure
3 minute readUS Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Brought Under NYC Gender Violence Law, Ruling Claims Barred Under State Measure
Trending Stories
- 1Doug Emhoff, Husband of Former VP Harris, Lands at Willkie
- 2LexisNexis Announces Public Availability of Personalized AI Assistant Protégé
- 3Some Thoughts on What It Takes to Connect With Millennial Jurors
- 4Artificial Wisdom or Automated Folly? Practical Considerations for Arbitration Practitioners to Address the AI Conundrum
- 5The New Global M&A Kings All Have Something in Common
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