Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether DHS's decision to wind down the DACA policy is judicially reviewable
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED This dispute concerns the policy of immigration enforcement discretion known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). In 2016, this Court affirmed, by an equally divided Court, a decision of the Fifth Circuit holding that two related Department of Homeland Security (DHS) discretionary enforcement policies, including an expansion of the DACA policy, were likely unlawful and should be enjoined. See United States v. Texas, 136 8. Ct. 2271 (per curiam). In September 2017, DHS determined that the original DACA policy was unlawful and would likely be struck down by the courts on the same grounds as the related policies. DHS thus instituted an orderly wind-down of the DACA policy. The questions presented are as follows: 1. Whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is judicially reviewable. 2. Whether DH98’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful. (1)
Docket Entries
2020-07-20
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2020-04-20
Motion of respondents Martin Jonathan Batalla Vidal, et al. in No. 18-589 for leave to file a supplemental brief after oral argument GRANTED.
2020-04-02
Motion of respondents Martin Jonathan Batalla Vidal, et al. in No. 18-589 for leave to file a supplemental brief after oral argument filed (in 18-589). (Distributed)
2019-10-04
Brief amici curiae of Immigration Law Scholars filed. (Distributed)
2019-10-03
Brief amici curiae of Nineteen Colleges And Universities filed. (Distributed)
2019-09-17
Record received from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.
2019-09-17
Record received from the U.S.D.C. District of Califorina, San Francisco Division is electronic and located on PACER with the exception of Sealed documents which is electronically filed.
2019-09-16
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.
2019-08-23
Brief amici curiae of Professors--Dean Ronald A. Cass, et al. in support of neither party filed.
2019-07-30
Joint motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits is granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including August 19, 2019. The time to file respondents' briefs on the merits is extended to and including September 27, 2019. The reply brief is to be filed in accordance with Rule 25.3.
2019-07-29
Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Princeton University, Microsoft Corporation, Maria De La Cruz Perales Sanchez
2019-07-23
Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, County of Santa Clara and Service Employees International Union Local 521.
2019-06-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/27/2019.
2019-06-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2019.
2019-06-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.
2019-01-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/18/2019.
2019-01-04
Reply of petitioners Department of Homeland Security, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2018-12-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/11/2019.
2018-12-26
Letter waiving the 14-day waiting period under Rule 15.5 filed.
2018-12-17
Brief of respondents States of California, et al. in opposition filed.
2018-12-17
Brief of respondents Regents of the Univeristy of California, et al. in opposition filed.
2018-12-17
Brief of respondents Dulce Garcia, et al. in opposition filed.
2018-12-05
Brief amicus curiae of Immigration Reform Law Institute filed.
2018-12-04
Brief amicus curiae of Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund filed.
2018-12-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 17, 2018, for all respondents.
2018-11-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 5, 2018 to December 17, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-11-27
Letter of November 27, 2018 from the Solicitor General with respect to corrected supplemental brief of petitioners filed. (11/28/2018)
2018-11-19
Supplemental brief of petitioners Department of Homeland Security, et al. filed. (Corrected version submitted)
2018-11-19
Supplemental brief of petitioners Department of Homeland Security, et al. filed. (11/28/2018)
2018-11-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due December 5, 2018)
Attorneys
109 Cities, Counties, Municipalities, and Local Government Advocacy Organizations
127 Religious Organizations
143 U.S. Business Associations and Companies
Administrative Law Practitioners
Administrative Law Scholars
American Council on Education and 43 Other Higher Education Associations
American Historical Association, Organization of American Historians, 42 Historians, and The Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality
American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, American Academy of Pediatrics, Center for Law and Social Policy, and 33 Child Advocacy Organizations, Medical Professionals, and Child Development Experts
Association of American Medical Colleges, et al.
Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
Citizens United, Citizens United Foundation, and The Presidential Coalition, LLC
Citizens United, Citizens United Foundation, English First Foundation, Public Advocate of the U.S., The Senior Citizens League, 60 Plus Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund, Patriotic Vete
County of Santa Clara and Service Employees International Union Local 521
Current and Former Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Leaders
Current Members of Congress and Bipartisan Former Members of Congress
DACA Recipients and State of New Jersey
Department of Homeland Security, et al.
Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund
Former Homeland Security and Immigration Officials
Former National Security Officials
Former Service Secretaries, et al.
Government of the United Mexican States
Immigration Reform Law Institute
Institutions of Higher Education
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, et al.
Martin Jonathan Batalla Vidal, et al.
NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.
National Education Association and National PTA
National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance
National School Boards Association, School Superintendents Association, National Association of Secondary School Principals, and American School Counselor Association
Nineteen Colleges And Universities
Nonprofit Legal Services Organizations
Princeton University, Microsoft Corporation, Maria De La Cruz Perales Sanchez
Professors--Dean Ronald A. Cass, Christopher C. Demuth, Sr., James L. Huffman
Public Citizen, Inc, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., American Civil Liberties Union
Public Interest Law Center, et al.
Regents of the Univeristy of California and Janet Napolitano, President of the University of California
Service Employees International Union, American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
Southeastern Legal Foundation
States of California, et al.
The National Association of Home Builders, The Real Estate Roundtable, and The Essential Worker Immigration Coalition
Tim Cook, Deirdre O'Brien and Apple
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops et al.
United We Dream and 50 Organizations