Trump Administration Seeks SCOTUS Cert in DACA Suits
DOJ attorneys filed a writ of certiorari before judgment over two suits currently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in addition to similar requests from the Ninth and D.C. circuits.
November 05, 2018 at 06:49 PM
3 minute read
The Trump Department of Justice sought Monday to have the U.S. Supreme Court step in to put a halt to legal battles in three jurisdictions over the decision to wind-down an Obama-era immigration program in 2017.
In a writ of certiorari before judgment, DOJ attorneys announced the move seeking the high court's intervention in cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second, Ninth and D.C. circuits. All three circuits have decisions from lower courts that concluded the rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals “either is or likely is unlawful,” according to the DOJ's filing.
“Those decisions are wrong and they warrant this court's immediate review,” the government stated.
In a statement issued via Twitter, New York State Attorney General Barbara Underwood, who leads a suit by more than a dozen state plaintiffs challenging the DACA recession, said the DOJ “has shown a remarkable lack of respect for the judicial process by repeatedly seeking to skip over the lower courts and, rather, go straight to the Supreme Court.”
As it stands, New York's suit is bound to another suit filed by private parties in the Second Circuit, up on interlocutory appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. As the DOJ filing noted, the Second Circuit is expected to file petitions for writs from all three jurisdictions “to ensure that the court has an adequate vehicle in which to resolve the questions presented in a timely and definitive manner.”
Part of the DOJ's urgency comes from nationwide preliminary injunctions issued by U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis of the Eastern District of New York and U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Central District of California. Both injunctions halted the recession process, even while allowing the Department of Homeland Security to cease enrolling new DACA recipients.
The DOJ argued in its brief that its decision to dismantle the DACA program was supported by a 2015 order in United States v. Texas, out of the Fifth Circuit. That decision, by upholding a lower court's injunction, effectively put an end to DACA sister programs. The underlying logic of Texas has been used by the DOJ and other executive agencies and departments to attack DACA, which they claim suffers from the same legal infirmities identified by the Fifth Circuit.
In a statement, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions argued that since the Obama administration “started DACA without a mandate or even an authorization from Congress or the courts; this administration can therefore end DACA at any time.”
“That is what we have done, and it was the lawful thing to do. Immigration law in this country—and the status of DACA recipients in particular—ultimately must be settled by our representatives in Congress,” Sessions said. “The Department of Justice should not have been forced to make this filing today—the Ninth Circuit should have acted expeditiously, just as the Supreme Court expected them to do—but we will not hesitate to defend the constitutional system of checks and balances vigorously and resolutely.”
Related:
DOJ Drums Up Second Threat to a Circuit Court Over DACA Deadline
This Young Attorney Is the First DACA Recipient Admitted to Practice Law in Connecticut
Jeff Sessions Accuses Federal Judge in NY Census Suit of Judicial Overreach
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 AllProsecutors Ask Judge to Question Charlie Javice Lawyer Over Alleged Conflict
Trending Stories
- 1Courts Demonstrate Growing Willingness to Sanction Courtroom Misuse of AI
- 2The New Rules of AI: Part 1—Managing Risk
- 3Change Is Coming to the EEOC—But Not Overnight
- 4Med Mal Defense Win Stands as State Appeals Court Rejects Arguments Over Blocked Cross-Examination
- 5Rejecting 'Blind Adherence to Outdated Precedent,’ US Judge Goes His Own Way on Attorney Fees
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