The Supreme Court should bypass the Ninth Circuit and weigh in on a legal battle over an immigration program to avoid further disruption in immigration enforcement, the Justice Department argued in a petition to the high court Thursday. The appeal asks the court to put the case on a fast track and rule before the scheduled end of its term in late June.
The department announced it would immediately appeal to the Supreme Court Tuesday. Without this Court's immediate intervention, the court's injunction will persist at least for months while an appeal is resolved and, if the court of appeals does not reverse the injunction, it could continue for more than a year given the Court's calendar. It urged the justices to take on the case immediately, telling them that the district court's "unprecedented order requires the government to sanction indefinitely an ongoing violation of federal law being committed by almost 700,000 aliens-and, indeed, to confer on them affirmative benefits (including work authorization) pursuant to the DACA policy".
The appeal was filed with the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The brief also mentioned the potential for "onerous discovery".
The clash now at the court arose last fall, when the Trump administration announced that it would terminate DACA, which would result in some of the 800,000 young adults who qualified for the program becoming eligible to be deported. "Respondents, the government, and the district court alike all have repeatedly asserted that a speedy resolution is critical".
'I am Not a Racist'
He was in the meeting with the president regarding a bipartisan compromise on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Trump spoke before having dinner with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) at his Trump International Golf Club .
That same day, President Donald Trump met with lawmakers to discuss the creation of a clean DREAM Act that would allow DACA recipients and undocumented immigrants, also known as Dreamers, a path to citizenship without the attachment of Trump's border wall funding or the end to the US visa lottery program.
The Supreme Court rarely accepts such petitions, but Francisco noted that it has made exceptions in cases of grave importance. "The Acting Secretary opted to wind down DACA after reasonably concluding that the policy was likely to be struck down by courts and indeed was unlawful". In a press release, US attorney general Jeff Sessions declared that the government would also take what he described as the "rare step" of going directly to the Supreme Court - a procedure known as "certiorari before judgment".
"And even if it were reviewable now under the APA, the decision to rescind the DACA policy was not arbitrary and capricious".
The first group of those so-called dreamers had been set to lose their protected status in March before U.S. District Judge William H. Alsup's order.