Results 1 to 4 of 4
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Beezer

Thread: Biden Admin Promises Legal ‘Response’ After Court Declares DACA Illegal

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member Scott-in-FL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    5,824

    Biden Admin Promises Legal ‘Response’ After Court Declares DACA Illegal

    Biden Admin Promises Legal ‘Response’ After Court Declares DACA Illegal



    JENNIE TAER INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER
    October 06, 2022 11:19 AM ET

    The Biden administration says it will take legal action after a court declared Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) illegal Wednesday.

    The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’
    ruling “deeply disappointed” Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who said his department will work with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to devise an “appropriate legal response.” The case will go back to a lower court while nearly 600,000 DACA recipients currently in the U.S. will be able to remain in the program.

    “The Department of Justice respectfully disagrees with the decision and will continue to vigorously defend the lawfulness of DACA as this case proceeds,” DOJ spokesperson Dena Iverson told the Daily Caller News Foundation.



    Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas
    @SecMayorkas
    ·
    Follow

    I am deeply disappointed by today’s
    #DACA ruling and the ongoing uncertainty it creates for families and communities across the country. We are currently reviewing the court’s decision and will work with @TheJusticeDept on an appropriate legal response. (1/)

    8:17 PM · Oct 5, 2022

    Wednesday’s decision is part of a 2018 lawsuit led by nine Republican states, contesting the legality of then-President Barack Obama’s 2012 program.

    “DACA—part of Dems’ program to flood our country with aliens—is illegal & will stay enjoined. Huge victory for the Rule of Law in America!,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton wrote in a tweet Wednesday.

    The Biden administration attempted in August to codify DACA as a federal regulation before the latest decision. A federal judge ruled in July 2021 that the Biden administration couldn’t process new DACA applications, which the administration appealed.

    “Today, we are taking another step to do everything in our power to preserve and fortify DACA, an extraordinary program that has transformed the lives of so many Dreamers,” Mayorkas said at the time.

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) says it will continue to accept DACA renewal requests and will accept new requests without processing them.

    DHS didn’t respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

    Biden Admin Promises Legal ‘Response’ After Court Declares DACA Illegal | The Daily Caller



    Last edited by Scott-in-FL; 10-06-2022 at 11:49 AM.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Moderator Beezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    25,721
    The legal response should be to prosecute Obama and Biden for this unlawful Executive Order and abuse of power.

    Hand them all over to their Embassy to process and transport back home.

    Their FREE ride is over!
    TO BECOME AN AMERICAN YOU MUST CHANGE YOUR VALUES ...NOT YOUR LOCATION

    STAY HOME AND BUILD AMERICA ON YOUR SOIL

  3. #3
    Moderator Beezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    25,721
    Appeals Court: DACA is Unlawful


    The new DACA regulation is subject to the same legal defects as the original program



    Facebook

    Twitter

    Reddit

    LinkedIn

    Email

    Copy Link



    By Elizabeth Jacobs on October 6, 2022



    On October 5, 2022, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program is unlawful, but remanded the case to the lower district court to reconsider the legal challenge as it applies to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) new DACA regulation.

    The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision finding that the original program, which was created by a DHS memorandum in 2012, violated both procedural and substantive law, stating that “Congress determined which aliens can receive these benefits, and it did not include DACA recipients among them. We agree with the district court’s reasoning and its conclusions that the DACA Memorandum contravenes comprehensive statutory schemes for removal, allocation of lawful presence, and allocation of work authorization.”

    The decision allows current DACA recipients to maintain and renew their DACA status and work authorization while the case is pending resolution in the district court. DHS, however, is prohibited from approving new (or “initial”) DACA applications. Despite this order, USCIS has decided to continue to accept initial applications, but will only process renewals while the court order is in effect. The final DACA regulation does not go into effect until October 31, 2022.

    Background. By way of background, DACA provides immigration benefits, including lawful presence, employment authorization, and forbearance from deportation to certain aliens who are in the United States illegally. In addition to other eligibility criteria, these aliens must have been under the age of 31 on or before June 15, 2012 and have entered United States prior to 2007, thus making the eligible population between the ages of 26 to 42 years old.

    In July 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas ruled that DACA’s creation in 2012 via a three-page policy memorandum violated the notice-and-comment requirement under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

    The ruling went further, however, to hold that the program is also substantively invalid because DACA “is an unreasonable interpretation of the law because it usurps the power of Congress to dictate a national scheme of immigration laws and is contrary to the INA.” The court explained, “While the law certainly grants some discretionary authority to the agency, it does not extend to include the power to institute a program that gives deferred action and lawful presence, and in turn, work authorization and multiple other benefits to 1.5 million individuals who are in the country illegally.”

    While appealing this decision, DHS codified DACA by issuing a final regulation as an attempt to legitimize the program and strengthen the agency’s legal posturing.

    (The White referred to this as "preserving and fortifying" DACA.) Despite being bound by the district court’s ruling, DHS reached the incredible (and unlawful) conclusion that it can continue with rulemaking because it disagrees with the court. DHS acknowledged the full extent of district court ruling in a footnote in the proposed DACA regulation, writing “The district court in Texas II also concluded that ‘DACA is an unreasonable interpretation of the law because it usurps the power of Congress to dictate a national scheme of immigration laws and is contrary to the INA.’” Brazenly, DHS responded by stating, “The Department respectfully disagrees” and went on to reiterate the same view of DACA that the federal district court rejected in litigation.

    The DACA Regulation Is Unlikely to Survive District Court’s Review. In its July 2021 decision, the district court signaled that a regulation codifying the program would not survive legal scrutiny so long as it continued to directly conflict with numerous federal statutes.

    The court explained that, “Against the background of Congress’ ‘careful plan,’ DHS may not award lawful presence and work authorization to approximately 1.5 million aliens for whom Congress has made no provision.” The district court determined that Congress has expressly not authorized DACA.

    DACA is more than, as DHS purported in litigation, an exercise of prosecutorial discretion resulting from limited agency resources. Like the original program, DHS’s new DACA regulation ignores statutorily mandated removal proceedings and goes further to provide immigration benefits to aliens with no lawful access. Because the regulation leaves intact nearly all of the original program’s benefits and features, it is still subject to the same legal issues.

    Furthermore, the new DACA regulation does nothing to fix the legal issues the district court found the program created by allowing DACA recipients to receive advance parole. Advance parole is a privilege that allows aliens to leave the United States and then lawfully re-enter the country without being turned away at a port of entry. It is designed to be awarded only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.

    As explained in detail by the district court, by allowing DACA recipients to receive advance parole, the program (and now regulation) directly contradicts Congress’ scheme to restrict green card eligibility from aliens who have not been “lawfully admitted or paroled into the United States” and subverts the three- and 10- year bars Congress inserted into the Immigration and Nationality Act to prohibit aliens who have been unlawfully present in the United States for 180 days or 365 days, respectively, from reentering the country for three or 10 years. Because the district court recognized this conflict when analyzing the 2012 DACA memorandum, there is little reason to believe that the district court will find that the regulation, which expressly permits this practice, is valid.

    DACA Is Bad Immigration Policy.

    The creation and maintenance of the DACA program is one of the strongest pull factors that have ignited modern border crisis. While the program currently limits eligibility to those who have resided in the United States since June 2007, the message being sent around the world is that illegal entry will be rewarded and unlawful presence will be wiped away by executive action.

    As a result of the Biden administration’s commitment to maintaining DACA and dismantling immigration enforcement within the interior of the United States, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported the greatest numbers of apprehensions at the Southwest border in the country’s history.

    Through the end of August, Border Patrol agents apprehended nearly two million aliens who entered the United States illegally over the Southwest border in FY 2022, and reported 1,659,206 apprehensions for FY 2021.

    DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas issued a press release shortly after the decision was issued, stating that he was “deeply disappointed” by the ruling, but acknowledged Congress’ role in providing “permanent protection” to DACA recipients.

    As of the end of March 2022, there are 611,270 people enrolled in DACA.

    Topics: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)


    https://cis.org/Jacobs/Appeals-Court-DACA-Unlawful
    Last edited by Beezer; 10-06-2022 at 02:29 PM.
    TO BECOME AN AMERICAN YOU MUST CHANGE YOUR VALUES ...NOT YOUR LOCATION

    STAY HOME AND BUILD AMERICA ON YOUR SOIL

  4. #4
    Moderator Beezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    25,721
    Terminate their UNLAWFUL work permits and make them self-deport.
    Scott-in-FL likes this.
    TO BECOME AN AMERICAN YOU MUST CHANGE YOUR VALUES ...NOT YOUR LOCATION

    STAY HOME AND BUILD AMERICA ON YOUR SOIL

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-23-2022, 07:23 AM
  2. Biden Admin Promises to Ignore DC Court Ruling That Protects Religiously Exempt From
    By Airbornesapper07 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-31-2021, 02:10 AM
  3. Biden’s DHS Violates Court Order by Approving Illegal Aliens for DACA
    By Scott-in-FL in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-02-2021, 03:42 PM
  4. Appeals court says Trump admin can't end DACA
    By JohnDoe2 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-08-2019, 02:22 PM
  5. Supreme Court sets guidelines for DACA legal fight
    By JohnDoe2 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-21-2017, 08:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •