University of California, With Covington's Help, Sues Trump Over DACA
UC president Janet Napolitano signed the directive implementing DACA when she was secretary of homeland security in 2012.
September 08, 2017 at 02:53 PM
9 minute read
University of California president Janet Napolitano took to the court Friday to protect a policy she helped create, which temporarily shields children of undocumented immigrants from deportation.
Lawyers for Covington & Burling, working pro bono, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of Napolitano and the regents of the University of California against the Department of Homeland Security. The lawsuit claims that by rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, known as DACA, DHS and acting Secretary Elaine Duke violated the Administrative Procedures Act and the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Napolitano, as DHS secretary in 2012, issued the memo that created DACA.
“At the University of California, we see the exceptional contributions that Dreamers make every day,” Napolitano said on a call with reporters Friday. “They really represent the spirit of the American dream and, by its action, the administration has dashed those dreams. We hope by this lawsuit to restore those dreams and to restore DACA to its rightful place.”
Napolitano said the UC student body includes thousands of undocumented immigrants, a “proportion of which” are DACA recipients. There are also members of the staff who are DACA recipients.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the end of the DACA program Tuesday, and a group of Democratic state attorneys general filed a lawsuit in New York federal court over the decision the next day. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra did not join the group. Becerra said his office is planning its own lawsuit that will be filed California.
The Covington group representing UC includes San Francisco-based partner Jeffrey Davidson and Alan Bersin, a policy consultant and former DHS official. Also on the team is partner and former Justice Department Criminal Division Chief Lanny Breuer, senior counsel Mark Lynch, partner Alexander Berengaut and associates Megan Crowley, Ashley Nyquist and Ivano Ventresca, all based in Washington, D.C.
In the lawsuit, UC claims the rescission of the policy violates the school's Fifth Amendment right to due process. The university said it will suffer by losing the “value of the time and money it invested” in students who are DACA recipients when and if they are deported, as well as “their contributions” to the university community.
“The rescission and actions taken by defendants to rescind DACA unlawfully deprive the university and its students of these and other constitutionally-protected interests without due process of law,” the lawsuit said. “Such deprivation occurred with no notice or opportunity to be heard.”
The complaint alleges DHS violated the Administrative Procedure Act in two ways. The first is by rescinding the policy without a “reasonable explanation.” Sessions said in his announcement that DHS chose to end the policy because it was unconstitutional and an abuse of presidential authority. UC's complaint alleges the opposite, so the decision to end it is “arbitrary and capricious.”
The second violation, the school said, is DHS did not go through the typical “notice and comment” process federal agencies use, which allows the public to see and comment on rules and regulations before they're issued.
When DACA was created in 2012, DHS did not go through a notice and comment period. Napolitano said the APA did not apply then, because DACA was created as “an individual, case-by-case determination as an exercise of prosecutorial discretion.” Individuals apply to DHS to receive the designation, which they only get if they fit a very particular set of criteria.
But removing the policy is a different story, Napolitano said, because it “removes DACA for a whole category of individuals.” Therefore, the APA does apply. She added there's been a “substantial reliance” on the policy by individuals, so removing the policy without input also implicates the APA.
Related Articles:
|- Trump's DOJ Backs Colorado Baker Who Refused Service to Gay Couple
- Ninth Circuit Sides With Hawaii, Rules Grandparents Exempt From Trump's Travel Ban
- From Migrant Field Worker to Big Law Managing Partner—The Remarkable Journey of Joshua Briones
- Trump Makes First Ninth Circuit Pick Setting Up Senate Fight
University of California president Janet Napolitano took to the court Friday to protect a policy she helped create, which temporarily shields children of undocumented immigrants from deportation.
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 AllAppellate Judges Grill Lawyer for Ex-Uber Security Chief Who Wants Conviction Tossed
After Guiding Illumina Through Harrowing Merger Fight, GC Charles Dadswell to Depart
FTC Goes After AI Tool That Has Capability to Mass Produce Fake Reviews
6 minute readTrump, Harris Might Alter DOJ, FTC Enforcement in Counterintuitive Ways
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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