Split Supreme Court appears ready to allow DACA to end
Court’s conservatives seem willing to allow action by Trump administration
WASHINGTON — Sharply at odds with liberal justices, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority seemed ready Tuesday to allow the Trump administration to abolish protections that permit 660,000 immigrants to work in the U.S., free from the threat of deportation.
That outcome would “destroy lives,” declared Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one the court’s liberals who repeatedly suggested the administration has not adequately justified its decision to end the sevenyear-old Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Nor has it taken sufficient account of the personal, economic and social disruption that might result, they said.
But there did not appear to be any support among the five conservatives for blocking the administration. The nine-member court’s decision is expected by June, at the height of the 2020 presidential campaign.
President Donald Trump said on Twitter that DACA recipients shouldn’t despair if the justices side with him, pledging that “a deal will be made with the Dems for them to stay!” But Trump’s past promises to work with Democrats on a legislative solution for these immigrants have led nowhere.
The president also said in his tweet that many program participants, brought to the U.S. as children and now here illegally, are “far from ‘angels,’” and he claimed that “some are very tough, hardened criminals.” The program bars anyone with a felony conviction from participating, and serious misdemeanors may also bar eligibility.
In New Mexico, there are about 6,800 young people with DACA protection.
“From here until the decision is made our people feel more empowered than ever and are going to continue to push the message that they are here to stay and our home is here,” said Flaviano Graciano, an organizer with United We Dream in New Mexico.
That organization, along with the New Mexico Dream Team, will continue a campaign to raise awareness about the need for DACA protections and encourage those who qualify to continue applying for the program while they wait for a decision from the Supreme Court.
“It’s going to be a long period of waiting but we’re not going to take it sitting down,” Graciano said. “We’re going to stand up and take action.”
He and more than 50 members of the New Mexico Dream Team/United We Dream traveled from Albuquerque to Austin to join other youth protesting outside Texas Attorney
General Ken Paxton’s office. Paxton urged the Trump administration to end DACA in 2017.
“I definitely feel inspired and hopeful for the future. All the youth that came out for DACA was very inspiring,” said Victor Romero, a University of New Mexico student who spoke at the rally in Austin.
Romero has legal residency now but was undocumented until the age of 14.
“I know what the struggling of being undocumented is. I come from a mixed status family. A lot of my cousins are undocumented,” he said.
Some DACA recipients, commonly known as “Dreamers,” were at the Supreme Court for the arguments, and many people camped out in front of the court for days for a chance at some of the few seats available. The term comes from never-passed proposals in Congress called the DREAM Act.
The high court arguments did not involve any discussion of individual DACA recipients or Trump’s claims.
Instead the focus was on whether either of two administration rationales for ending DACA, begun under President Barack Obama, was enough.
Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric was a key part of his presidential campaign in 2016, and his administration has pointed to a court ruling striking down the expansion of DACA and creation of similar protections, known as DAPA, for undocumented immigrants whose children are U.S. citizens as reasons to bring the program to a halt.
After lower courts stepped in to keep the program alive, the administration produced a new explanation memo from Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh were among the justices who indicated on Tuesday that the administration has provided sufficient reason for doing away with the program. Kavanaugh referred to Nielsen’s memo at one point as “a very considered decision.” Roberts suggested that worries that DACA is not legal might be enough to support ending it.
Roberts, who could hold the pivotal vote on the court, aimed his few questions at lawyers representing DACA recipients and their supporters. He did not seriously question the administration’s argument.
However, justices’ questions don’t always foretell their votes. In June the chief justice surprised many when he cast the deciding vote to prevent the administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, despite not voicing much skepticism during arguments in the case.
Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito raised questions on Tuesday about whether courts should even be reviewing the executive branch’s discretionary decisions.
If the court agrees with the administration in the DACA case, Congress could follow up by voting to put the program on surer legal footing. But the absence of comprehensive immigration reform by Congress is what prompted Obama to create DACA in the first place, in 2012, giving people two-year renewable reprieves from the threat of deportation while also allowing them to work.
U.S. Rep. Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., called the decision by the Trump administration to do away with the DACA program “illegal and wrong,” while U.S. Sen. Tom Udall labeled it “heartless and short-sided.”
“My hope is that the Supreme Court will uphold the lower courts’ rulings and stand with the American people,” said Luján, noting that a large majority of Americans supported Dreamers. Journal staff writers Angela Kocherga and Scott Turner contributed to this report.