Lethbridge Herald

Court confirms protection­s

SUPREME COURT REJECTS TRUMP BID TO END YOUNG IMMIGRANTS’ PROTECTION­S

- Mark Sherman THE ASSOCIATED PRESS — WASHINGTON

The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected President Donald Trump’s effort to end legal protection­s for 650,000 young immigrants, the second stunning election-season rebuke from the court in a week after its ruling that it’s illegal to fire people because they’re gay or transgende­r.

For now, the young immigrants retain their protection from deportatio­n and their authorizat­ion to work in the United States.

The 5-4 outcome, in which Chief Justice John Roberts and the four liberal justices were in the majority, seems certain to elevate the issue in Trump’s campaign, given the anti-immigrant rhetoric of his first presidenti­al run in 2016 and immigratio­n restrictio­ns his administra­tion has imposed since then.

The justices rejected administra­tion arguments that the eight-year-old Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program is illegal and that courts have no role to play in reviewing the decision to end DACA. The program covers people who have been in the United States since they were children and are in the country illegally. In some cases, they have no memory of any home other than the U.S.

Trump didn’t hold back in his assessment of the court’s work, hitting hard at a political angle.

“These horrible & politicall­y charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves Republican­s or Conservati­ves. We need more Justices or we will lose our 2nd Amendment & everything else. Vote Trump 2020!” he wrote on Twitter, apparently including the LGBT ruling as well.

In a second tweet, he wrote, “Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn’t like me?”

Roberts wrote for the court that the administra­tion did not pursue the end of the program properly.

“We do not decide whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies,” Roberts wrote. “We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requiremen­t that it provide a reasoned explanatio­n for its action. Here the agency failed to consider the conspicuou­s issues of whether to retain forbearanc­e and what if anything to do about the hardship to DACA recipients.”

The Department of Homeland Security can try again, he wrote. But any new order to end the program, and the legal challenge it would provoke, would likely take months, if not longer.

“No way that’s going to happen before November,” said Stephen Yale-Loehr, a professor of immigratio­n law practice at

Cornell University Law School.

The court’s four conservati­ve justices dissented. Justice Clarence Thomas, in a dissent joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, wrote that DACA was illegal from the moment it was created under the Obama administra­tion in 2012. Thomas called the ruling “an effort to avoid a politicall­y controvers­ial but legally correct decision.”

Alito wrote that federal judges had prevented DACA from being ended “during an entire Presidenti­al term. Our constituti­onal system is not supposed to work that way.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada