Trump Sees Supreme Court as Key in Fights Over DACA, Border Wall
“President Trump's comments display a disgraceful degree of disrespect for the Supreme Court and role of an independent federal judiciary,” Gibson Dunn's Ted Boutrous said.
January 03, 2019 at 06:23 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
President Donald Trump expressed confidence Wednesday that the U.S. Supreme Court will act in his favor on upcoming litigation to end DACA, a move that he said will help him negotiate with Democrats over funding the border wall.
During a freewheeling press conference, Trump sketched a scenario in which the high court strikes down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, thereby creating an opportunity for him to resurrect some version of it and win over Democratic support for the $5.6 billion security wall at the Mexican border.
“I think it's going to be overturned in the United States Supreme Court, and I think it's going to be overwhelmingly overturned. I mean, nobody thinks that should have happened,” Trump said. “So if we win that case—and I say this for all to hear—we'll be easily able to make a deal on DACA and the wall as a combination. But until we win that case, [Democrats] don't want to really talk about DACA.”
Trump added, “I think they're foolish if they don't want to make a deal with DACA. Because if we get overridden, that means everybody that's been here has to leave the country.”
Negotiations with Democrats over the fate of DACA were going well, Trump said, until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in November upheld a lower court judge's injunction blocking the federal government's rollback of the so-called Dreamers program, which protects from deportation certain undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children. The injunction was ordered by U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California.
After the injunction, Trump said, Democrats no longer had any incentive to negotiate over the fate of DACA. “It was a disgraceful situation that a judge ruled the way the judge ruled. But we think it's going to be overturned,” Trump said.
Just days before the Ninth Circuit ruled, U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco petitioned the Supreme Court, asking it to take the case before judgment. After the Ninth Circuit ruling, Francisco filed a supplemental brief, stating that “as a result of the court of appeals' decision, the court no longer needs to grant certiorari before judgment. The court can now consider the present petition as one for certiorari after judgment and, if it grants the petition, review the judgment of the court of appeals.”
Theodore Boutrous Jr., a partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher representing DACA recipients in the litigation, criticized Trump for treating the Supreme Court as if it can be used as a player in political negotiations.
“President Trump's comments display a disgraceful degree of disrespect for the Supreme Court and role of an independent federal judiciary,” Boutrous said Thursday. “He also clearly has no understanding of the legal issues being litigated around the country and that the court is being asked to consider. The Ninth Circuit and Judge Alsup (and other courts) correctly enjoined the unlawful rescission of DACA.”
Boutrous said there's no certainty the Supreme Court would agree to hear the DACA case in the first place.
“These rulings are at the preliminary injunction stage and thus not even final—so the president is getting way ahead of himself if he is counting on a victory,” Boutrous said. “The court is not going to be swayed by his misguided political outbursts, but they undermine respect for the rule of law.”
Read more:
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 AllElon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
Federal Judge Rejects Teams' Challenge to NASCAR's 'Anticompetitive Terms' in Agreement
Trending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
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