Read the Document: NJ's Brief to SCOTUS Defending 'Dreamers'
New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal on Thursday filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court defending the state's "Dreamers." Read it here.
September 26, 2019 at 06:17 PM
2 minute read
New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal on Thursday filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court defending the state's "Dreamers."
If the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) ended, an estimated 53,000 DACA-eligible residents in New Jersey, as well as 17,000 active, in-state DACA grantees, would suffer "catastrophic" harm, the brief argues.
Grewal's brief draws on the Garden State's successful litigation working in conjunction with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) in blocking a Texas-led effort to terminate DACA last year.
DACA started in 2012 and under the program, immigrants who came to the U.S. as children can stay in the country if they meet certain criteria and renew their applications every two years. In 2017, President Donald Trump rescinded DACA on grounds that it was illegal. The federal government's core argument before the U.S. Supreme Court is that DACA was an unconstitutional exercise of authority by former President Barack Obama—"executive overreach," then-U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said at the time.
Injunctions were granted requiring that Trump administration maintain the program while litigation went on. Last June 28, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would hear the DACA case.
New Jersey's brief asserts that DACA did not remove discretion from the U.S, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but rather provided "lawful agency guidance," according to a release from the Attorney General's Office. "This is not an academic exercise," Grewal said in a statement Thursday. "This is about real lives, real families and real futures."
Read New Jersey's brief here:
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllWhat Went Wrong With Adeel Mangi's Long, Strange Trip Through the Judicial Nomination Process?
6 minute readDemocrats Give Up Circuit Court Picks for Trial Judges in Reported Deal With GOP
Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
DOJ: TD Bank Agrees to Pay $3B Over Anti-Money Laundering Program Violations
2 minute readTrending Stories
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