Thread: Obama-era DACA program likely illegal: Judge

Ruling still allows Dreamers protections, as courts sort out legal mess

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Friday, August 31, 2018

A federal judge ruled Friday that the DACA deportation amnesty was probably illegal when President Obama created it in 2012 — but he refused to halt the program altogether, leaving it to other courts to sort out a major legal mess.

Judge Andrew S. Hanen’s ruling clashes with those of several other federal courts which said President Trump’s attempt last year to phase out the DACA program was also illegal.

Taken on face, the rulings mean that the program is illegal — but so is the effort to erase it from the books.

The issues are likely to speed through the circuit courts and quickly reach the Supreme Court, perhaps during its upcoming session.

But for now it leaves the program mostly intact, with current DACA recipients able to renew their work permits and two-year stays of deportation, though no new illegal immigrants are able to apply.

Judge Hanen said Mr. Obama exceeded his powers when he created the program, granting a broad amnesty from deportation to an entire class of people — in this case so-called “Dreamers,” who are young adults who came to the U.S. as juveniles, often without any say in the decision.

Judge Hanen said while the idea of aiding Dreamers may be right, Congress must act.

“DACA is a popular program and one that Congress should consider saving. Unfortunately, the judiciary is not the branch of government designed to salvage a program that should have emanated from Congress.”

The Obama administration had portrayed DACA as guidance to immigration officials on how to prioritize deportations. It said Dreamers were such a low priority that they couldn’t be deported — and further, said they should be given work permits, helping them enmesh themselves in American society. The policy was known as deferred action.

More than 800,000 Dreamers have taken advantage of the program since it first went into effect six years ago, using the work permits to earn driver’s licenses, claim Social Security numbers and gain eligibility for some taxpayer benefits.

From the start it was controversial. Mr. Obama himself had repeatedly said he lacked the authority to grant such a broad carve-out from deportation. His election-season reversal went largely unchallenged in the courts until last year, when Texas led a lawsuit arguing DACA was illegal.

The Trump administration, having already signaled its desire to cancel the program, sided with Texas — leaving Democratic-led state and immigrant-rights groups to mount a legal defense.

Judge Hanen, in his decision, said he was bound by precedent in a 2015 case that struck down a similar but broader Obama-era amnesty, known as DAPA, which would have applied to perhaps 4 million illegal immigrant parents with U.S. citizen or legal immigrant children, and would have expanded the 2012 DACA program, too.

In that case, which Judge Hanen also had a part in, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that such broad attempts to create immigration policy through deferred action violated the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Judge Hanen said there is little practical difference between operations of DACA and DAPA, so if the latter was illegal, the former is likely illegal as well.

The judge said neither DACA’s apparent popularity with the public nor the sympathy arisen by the plight of Dreamers can overcome the clear language of the INA.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...illegal-judge/

The constitution says the president "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed" and here was a president giving illegal aliens a card saying they can live and work here even thought THE LAWS SAYS THEY CAN'T!!!

This was NOT deferred prosecution as obama called it. He was not simply looking the other way. He was proactive and told each of them they had his permission to break the law.!!!! This is lawlessness on a scale america has never seen.

Another point is none of these dreamers could prove they came here as kids. Even ICE said half of them are frauds. How do you verify people using stolen IDs?

Judge Rejects Texas Request to Block DACA


August 31, 2018


A federal judge in Texas on Friday denied the state's request to invalidate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, saying the state had waited too long to file the suit and the results of ending the program now could harm the public.

The judge, however, did predict that a challenge to DACA will eventually be successful in front of the court, saying the program is likely illegal.



“The Court did not grant the preliminary injunction as it found that the States had delayed seeking this relief for years, that the balance of private interests fell in favor of the denial of the requested relief, and that implementing the relief at this point in time was contrary to the best interests of the public,” District Judge Andrew Hanen ruled.“This Court found that injuries would occur to the Plaintiff States if the injunction was denied, but denied the injunction because it found that the injuries that would occur to the Government and the Defendant-Intervenors if the injunction were granted would be more profound and significant,” he added.

He went on to say that he thought DACA was "contrary to the Administrative Procedure Act."

“Plaintiff States have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their claim that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals … program is contrary to the Administrative Procedure Act. … The court also found that the Plaintiff States had made a clear showing of irreparable injury,” Hanen said.

DACA is an Obama-era program that protects undocumented immigrants who came to the country as children from deportation.

Hanen is the third federal judge to prevent the end of the program since the Trump administration first rescinded it with a six-month delay last September.

Hanen has historically been opposed to programs like DACA, but this is the first time he’s ruled on such a program that is already in existence.


"Here, the egg has been scrambled," Hanen wrote. "To try to put it back in the shell with only a preliminary injunction record, and perhaps at great risk to many, does not make sense nor serve the best interests of this country."

Hanen stayed the case for 21 days, but left open the possibility to a hearing to extend the stay should any party want one.


http://thehill.com/homenews/state-wa...-to-block-daca