Trump Administration Moves to Dismiss Challenge to 'Public Charge' Rule, After SCOTUS Allows It to Take Effect
In a court filing, attorneys from the U.S. Department of Justice said that the lawsuit targeting the administration's "public charge" rule should be tossed in light of the high court's 5-4 decision Jan. 27, which allowed the new regulation to take effect while the case is litigated.
February 14, 2020 at 06:52 PM
3 minute read
Lawyers for the Trump administration moved late Friday to dismiss New York state's challenge to a rule that would make it easier for the federal government to deny legal status to immigrants who apply for public assistance, after the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a nationwide injunction blocking it from taking effect.
In a court filing, attorneys from the U.S. Department of Justice said that the lawsuit targeting the administration's "public charge" rule should be tossed in light of the high court's 5-4 decision Jan. 27, which allowed the new regulation to take effect while the case is litigated.
The attorneys also cited an opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, finding that the rule fell within authority of the executive branch to interpret who qualifies as a public charge under federal law.
"In light of the Supreme Court's stay of injunction, the Ninth Circuit's detailed ruling, and for the reasons discussed herein, defendants respectfully submit that the court should dismiss plaintiffs' complaint in full," the filing said.
Last October, U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels of the Southern District of New York became the first judge in the nation to block the rule's implementation in a ruling that was later upheld by a Manhattan-based federal appeals court.
According to Daniels, the administration had not adequately explained why it had introduced the new policy, which, he said, had no basis in U.S. immigration law and would discourage immigrants from applying for benefits to which they were otherwise legally entitled.
The rule seeks to change the definition of a public charge, a designation that has historically referred to individuals who are "predominantly reliant on government aid" for an extended period of time. Under the new rule, immigrants who receive one or more designated public benefits, such as Medicaid, food stamps and housing subsidies, for an aggregate of 12 months during a three-year period would be more likely to be deemed a public charge.
New York and immigrants rights groups have argued in separate lawsuits that the change unfairly targeted racial minorities and would cause irreparable harm to those groups if allowed to take effect.
In its filing Friday, the administration argued that the state had made no such showing, and separately asked Daniels to consolidate the two cases.
Both the Fourth and Ninth U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal have lifted similar injunctions entered by lower courts.
Read More:
2nd Circuit Refuses to Lift Injunction Preventing Implementation of 'Public Charge' Rule
Trump Administration Seeks to Impede NY Lawsuits Over 'Public Charge' Immigration Rule
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 AllPrivate Equity Giant KKR Refiles SDNY Countersuit in DOJ Premerger Filing Row
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
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