Posted on 04/25/2018 3:11:54 PM PDT by Signalman
Well, the battle over what to do for recipients enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals has been thrown back into the frying pan. Like crabgrass, this issue keeps arising—and causing headaches for the Trump administration. The Trump White House decided to gradually phase out the constitutionally questionable program, effectively rescinding an executive order issued by former President Obama. Yet, politically, they couldn’t leave almost one million illegal aliens subject to immediate deportation; the political consequences would be too great. So, they added in a six-month enforcement delay, affording Congress time to pass a DACA fix.
In other words, the Trump White House gave Congress time to pass the law the right way. Well, Democrats weren’t playing ball. This was the best option since close to a dozenstate attorneys general threatened to sue the Trump administration should they do nothing on DACA. White House lawyers felt rightly that they couldn’t defend the law in court. So, here we are. Failed DACA fixes, government shutdowns over illegal aliens, and Democrats turning down the legalization of 1.8 million illegals, putting them on the pathway to citizenship, in exchange for border wall funding. It’s been a whirlwind—an issue that’s been a thorn in the side of the administration. Health care is the other one. So, what’s new? Well, a federal judge says DACA has to be restarted, though he gave Department of Homeland Security three months to better elaborate on why this program should go (via NYT):
In the biggest setback yet for the Trump administration in its attempt to end a program that shields some undocumented young adults from deportation, a federal judge ruled Tuesday that the protections must stay in place and that the government must resume accepting new applications.
Judge John D. Bates of Federal District Court for the District of Columbia said that the administration’s decision to terminate the program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, was based on the “virtually unexplained” grounds that the program was “unlawful.”
The judge stayed his decision for 90 days and gave the Department of Homeland Security, which administers the program, the opportunity to better explain its reasoning for canceling it. If the department fails to do so, it “must accept and process new as well as renewal DACA applications,” Judge Bates said in the decision.
The ruling was the third in recent months against the Trump administration’s rollback of DACA. Federal judges in Brooklyn and in San Francisco each issued injunctions ordering that the program remain in place. But neither of those decisions required the government to accept new applications.
For all the lawyers out there, feel free to chime in, but I thought the constitutionally shaky ground for DACA stemmed from the fact that the executive passed legislation. We have separation of powers; DACA crossed that line. And the notion that a succeeding president can’t rescind an executive order of his predecessor sounds ridiculous.
On The Hill, there's chatter of a new DACA fix that has the support of at least 218 members of the House, which is enough for passage. It's a way to pressure Speaker Ryan to hold a vote, which he wasn't going to do. We'll see what happens now though.
Wasn’t DACA an invention out of thin air via an EO from 0bama?
Why doesn’t President Trump write an EO of his own to end this and keep it ended?
And...wasn’t DACA to die a Natural Death in March, 2018, versus those many of us dying Unnatural Deaths due to our Illegal Invader problems?
I’m confused...
LOL
Trump should look to the Andrew Jackson portrait in the Oval Office to determine the proper response to this usurping judge.
This is satire, right?
Only the supreme court ought to be able to overrule a president, not a poddly lower court judge. Until this check and balance is righted liberals will keep exploiting this strategy,.
A lawless scumbag judge ... so typically “progressive”.
This is part of the emerging case law that only applies to Presidents named Trump.
The Supreme Court should slap this down toot sweet, then he needs to be impeached and finally disbarred.
What is the debate? The program is illegal. What’s not to understand about aliens being in our country illegally .Does not matter how long they have been here or who brought them in. These Judges certainly are a problem.
There is no law authorizing DACA. There was an existing immigration law. Obama issued an executive order saying he was “deferring” action on enforcing that law.
Obama’s act was ruled illegal and he ignored the ruling.
This new ruling is in conflict with the one from Texas. He can ignore it and announce he is following the one from Texas.
>>Trump should look to the Andrew Jackson portrait in the Oval Office to determine the proper response to this usurping judge.
My thoughts exactly! Time to play hardball.
F#@$ you your dishonor hack.
I’m sorry, but I quit believing Trump gives a damn anymore about DACA. He’s capitulated on the subject. Gone over to the Uniparty side where illegals are given preferential treatment and refugees from shithole countries are welcome. Come on in!
Because if he DID mean what he said (past tense) he would send Federal Marshalls to the border, the airports and to the shitcanistan enclaves in the US where these illegals reside. He would send Federal Marshalls to round up judges, mayors and other idiots who openly defy our laws and our Constitution.
Trump should look to the Andrew Jackson portrait in the Oval Office to determine the proper response to this usurping judge.
*********
Absolutely....
How can this judge think he can enact legislation. That ruling is an impeachable offense.
my message to federal judge “You have 90 days to kiss my ass”
“Only the supreme court ought to be able to overrule a president, not a poddly lower court judge.”
Even that is not in the constitution. The only true enumerated check on the President is Congress where ultimately all power lies anyway. They can impeach him.
These district court judges are mostly family of big donors and power brokers local to a town or city. Absolutely unqualified for anything more than routine litigation issues. Trial lawyers at the best.
Here in Cincinnati, I give you Susan Dlott. Fat Jewish wife of disbarred class action Demorat big donor Stan Chesley who holds court with her two big smelly dogs and her cadre of crony/clerks. She spent her entire career defending P&G in a big firm and yet can order the POTUS around like a busboy.
Tell the judge to pound sand.
L
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.