Jump to content

Supreme Court leans towards Trump on ending 'Dreamers' immigrant programme


webfact

Recommended Posts

Supreme Court leans towards Trump on ending 'Dreamers' immigrant programme

By Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung

 

2019-11-12T212341Z_1_LYNXMPEFAB258_RTROPTP_4_USA-COURT-IMMIGRATION.JPG

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) lead a symbolic march to deliver the Dream Act, addressing young immmigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children, to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) office at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., November 12, 2019. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court's conservative majority signalled support on Tuesday for President Donald Trump's bid to kill a programme that protects hundreds of thousands of immigrants - dubbed "Dreamers" - who entered the United States illegally as children, even as liberal justices complained that the move would destroy lives.

 

The court's ideological divisions were on full display as it heard the administration's appeal of lower court rulings that blocked the Republican president's 2017 plan to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) programme, created in 2012 by his Democratic predecessor Barack Obama.

 

DACA currently shields about 660,000 immigrants - mostly Hispanic young adults - from deportation and provides them work permits, though not a path to citizenship. Trump's bid to end it is part of his hardline immigration polices.

 

Conservative justices questioned whether courts even have the power to review Trump's action and also seemed to reject the views of lower courts that his administration had failed to properly justify ending DACA, a programme Obama implemented after Congress failed to pass bipartisan immigration reform.

 

The court's 5-4 conservative majority includes two Trump appointees - Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh - who both indicated support for the president's action.

 

Liberal justices emphasized the large number of individuals, businesses and others who have relied on the programme and indicated that the administration did not sufficiently weigh those concerns. Justice Sonia Sotomayor referred to Trump's decision as a "choice to destroy lives" and indicated that his administration had failed to supply the required policy rationale to make the move lawful.

 

Kavanaugh said he assumed that the administration's analysis of the impact rescinding DACA would have on individuals was a "very considered decision."

 

"I mean, this is a serious decision. We all agree on that," Kavanaugh added.

 

A ruling is due by the end of June.

 

Trump's administration has argued that Obama exceeded his constitutional powers when he created DACA by executive action, bypassing Congress.

 

Trump has made his hardline immigration policies - cracking down on legal and illegal immigration and pursuing construction of a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border - a centrepiece of his presidency and 2020 re-election campaign.

 

The challengers who sued to stop Trump's action included a collection of states such as California and New York, people currently protected by the programme and civil rights groups.

 

Even if Trump were to lose this time, his administration would be free to come up with new reasons to end the programme in the future, a point picked up by Gorsuch.

 

"What good would another five years of litigation over the adequacy of that explanation serve?" Gorsuch asked.

Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, who could be the pivotal vote in deciding the case, likewise indicated he was satisfied with the administration's rationale.

 

Roberts, however, had appeared sympathetic to Trump in a case this year on the administration's attempt to add a contentious citizenship question to the 2020 census - a move critics said was intended to deter immigrants from being included in the nation's official population count. Roberts cast the decisive vote against the president in a 5-4 ruling.

 

TRAVEL BAN

The Supreme Court previously handed Trump a major victory on immigration policy last year when it upheld as lawful his travel ban blocking people from several Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States, finding that the president has broad discretion to set such policy.

 

Lower court rulings in California, New York and the District of Columbia left DACA in place, finding that Trump's move to rescind it was likely "arbitrary and capricious" and violated a U.S. law called the Administrative Procedure Act.

 

Immigration advocates and "Dreamers" - those who entered the U.S. illegally as children - protested outside of the Supreme Court on Tuesday as the justices heard oral arguments regarding the Trump administration's plan to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

 

The young people protected under DACA, Obama said, were raised and educated in the United States, grew up as Americans and often know little about their countries of origin.

 

Sotomayor, the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice, wondered if the court should take into account the fact that Trump has said he would look after "Dreamers."

 

"He hasn't" taken care of them, she said. "And that, I think, is something to be considered before you rescind a policy."

 

Much of the administration's reasoning was based on then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions' conclusion in 2017 that the programme was unlawful. Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pressed U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco, who argued the case for the administration, on the government's reliance on the assertion that DACA was unlawful.

 

The administration could have just said "we don't like DACA and we're taking responsibility for that instead of trying to put the blame on the law," Ginsburg said.

 

Francisco, who also argued the travel ban case, said the administration was not trying to shirk responsibility for ending a popular programme.

"We own this," Francisco said, referring to Trump's decision to kill DACA.

 

Trump has given mixed messages about the "Dreamers," saying in 2017 that he has "a great love" for them even as he sought to kill the programme that protected them from deportation.

 

Trump on Tuesday took to Twitter to attack "many" DACA recipients as "tough, hardened criminals," without offering evidence, and again dangled the possibility of a deal with congressional Democrats to allow people protected under the programme to remain in the United States. Trump has never proposed a detailed replacement for DACA.

 

Several hundred DACA supporters gathered outside the court on a grey and chilly Tuesday morning, chanting, banging drums and carrying signs that read "home is here" and "defend DACA."

 

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung; Additional reporting by Ted Hesson and Susan Heavey; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Will Dunham)

 

reuters_logo.jpg

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-11-13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s our Donald wrecking lives everywhere he goes thease have to be extra sweet for him they are kids they have no papers through no fault of their own but that’s ok by Donald this is 100% unessary un American and evil 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find if hard to believe that the US would deport any of these people so long as they do not engage in criminal activity...

 

It will likely become a hotly contested issue in the 2020 election...after which, will be used as leverage to pass through funding bills for the Mexican border wall and infrastructure.

 

The US needs these young people as much as they need the US...????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just deported a hispanic DACA recipient who arrived in the U.S. at 3 years old and served in the US Army for 6 years, fought in the Iraq and returned with P.T.S.D. and a brain injury, to Honduras. No doubt they said the usual "Thank you for your service" before telling him he was not wanted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tug said:

That’s our Donald wrecking lives everywhere he goes thease have to be extra sweet for him they are kids they have no papers through no fault of their own but that’s ok by Donald this is 100% unessary un American and evil 

 

Ignoring your obvious dislike of Trump (understandable) and your obvious political leanings.

 

Why do you believe the children of illegal immigrants who criminally entered the USA should be treated as legal citizens?

 

Either have laws and enforce them or change the laws. Politicizing laws, applying them selectively at the whim of politicians is a trait more associated with left wing political parties. It reinforces their notion that politicians are above the law and can disregard laws when they fancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

A possible court ruling on partisan line. Just like Thailand. OMG. ????

 

That's what happens Eric when Justice Systems are politicized and politicians try to put themselves above the law and influence how it is applied, enforced and judged.

 

Seem to remember a certain Mr. Lee was adept at this!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Estrada said:

They just deported a hispanic DACA recipient who arrived in the U.S. at 3 years old and served in the US Army for 6 years, fought in the Iraq and returned with P.T.S.D. and a brain injury, to Honduras. No doubt they said the usual "Thank you for your service" before telling him he was not wanted.

 

Nothing to say to this, except it is horrible.

What I would like to know is, why TopDeadSenter thinks this is a laughing matter!

...on the other hand...I am not surprised!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

That's what happens Eric when Justice Systems are politicized and politicians try to put themselves above the law and influence how it is applied, enforced and judged.

 

Seem to remember a certain Mr. Lee was adept at this!

In defense of Lee, those rulings that were positives for him were mainly defamation cases and not policies cases. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are all illegally in the USA so they need to  go to their home countries and apply to re-enter the USA like the millions of other people who have had to wait years and fill out all the paperwork.  Of course if the democrats decided to put the USMCA up for a vote and pass it I am sure POTUS could work with the democrats on sorting out the DACA problem.  Isn't politics all about: You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours......  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Illegal is Illegal ,their parents who also came here illegally can take their kids and go back home and do it the right way.  But who is responsible for all the free government money they received when living in America.  Maybe they need to give them the bill and say you can return after repaying that dept 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BTB1977 said:

Illegal is Illegal ,their parents who also came here illegally can take their kids and go back home and do it the right way.  But who is responsible for all the free government money they received when living in America.  Maybe they need to give them the bill and say you can return after repaying that dept 

 

BTB1977 you are correct.  I don't know what part of these children were "DELIBERATELY' brought to the USA illegally is difficult to understand.  Their parents counted on the fact they were children to sway officials to allow them to stay.  You either are a country that has laws that are enforced or you have a lawless society  What kind of society would you have if people can each choose which laws they wish to enforce and which ones to ignore.  DACA was illegal to begin with.  Only congress can pass IMMIGRATION laws and Obama did it by executive action.  Certainly if Obama can create the program by executive action, Trump has the authority to end it.  Finally, I am surprised by the number of Thai Visa posts from people decrying the USA stopping illegals.  Consider, what Thailand does to foreigners just to allow them to enter and reside in the country.  I commend Thailand for their actions.  They are protecting their borders, language and culture by not wanting it over run with foreigners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, rhyddid said:

Racist country with racist judges and racist governments will only end in a global wars and the end of this disgraced humanity !

Rhyddid, a country without immigration laws makes every person a citizen of its country.  The USA allows in more immigrants legally than any nation on earth.  There are also upwards of 100 - 150 thousand entering illegally.  Remember out of misguided compassion putting one too many people in a lifeboat and the boat sinks and everyone dies. Though it is a big country, there is a limit to the number of people, particularly indigent ones requiring government assistance that it can afford and assimilate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comprehensive immigration reform has been needed for a long time but the Democrats keep turning a blind eye to the situation at the southern border. I think this reform could include a palatable solution for DACA but Immigration Reform should be more of a non-partisan effort and the Democrats are too busy trying to impeach Trump so very little if anything is being accomplished by the present congress.  Shame on all of them !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Ignoring your obvious dislike of Trump (understandable) and your obvious political leanings.

 

Why do you believe the children of illegal immigrants who criminally entered the USA should be treated as legal citizens?

 

Either have laws and enforce them or change the laws. Politicizing laws, applying them selectively at the whim of politicians is a trait more associated with left wing political parties. It reinforces their notion that politicians are above the law and can disregard laws when they fancy.

Daca is a (PATH)to citizenship for thease unfortunate individuals not a freebie as you allude your Donald is destroying the lives of children who were put in this unfortunate situation it is unessary wrong and unamerican it imo is straight up evil.as far as my utter dislike and revulsion towards Donald Trump you are correct he has earned it with interest but don’t assume I’m a leftwingnut lol you would be surprised 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought courts were there to decide the legitimacy of decisions based on the law. Now it has become a political decision, or a decision regarding safety and humanity? Things have gone belly up around here. The U.S. has 3 branches of government independent of each other to prevent this exact problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, scoutman360 said:

I thought courts were there to decide the legitimacy of decisions based on the law. Now it has become a political decision, or a decision regarding safety and humanity? Things have gone belly up around here. The U.S. has 3 branches of government independent of each other to prevent this exact problem.


Why are you assuming the court was wrong about the legitimacy of the law?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...