3 ms·
That's not right. They didn't rule on its legality at all (though they have in the past, in other cases, and let it stand as it exists). They ruled that the e
by newacct583 6y ago
That's not right. They didn't rule on its legality at all (though they have in the past, in other cases, and let it stand as it exists). They ruled that the executive branch (under Trump) has the authority to cancel the EO written under the Obama administration (which is sort of a "duh" thing, of course it does), but that the justification provided for the action was arbitrary and capricious (in the technical sense defined by the Administrative Procedures Act).
Loosely: any president can undo any executive action by a previous president, but you can't chuck a law simply because you don't want immigrants in the country.
Really all the Trump administration needs to do is write up a reasonable plan for rolling this back and they can do it.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- qserasera 6y agohttps://www.scotusblog.com/2020/06/opinion-analysis-court-rejects-trump-administrations-effort-to-end-daca/ https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/06/opinion-analysis-court-re... > Roberts then went on to the second step in the court’s inquiry. The Duke memorandum, he observed, concluded that DACA was illegal and should be terminated because it made DACA recipients eligible for benefits such as Social Security, Medicare and the ability to work legally in the United States. Roberts declined to weigh in on whether the Trump administration was correct in concluding that DACA was illegal I suppose we are in limbo here