s
s
Sections
Search
We don't just cover the North Bay. We live here.
Did You Know? In the first 10 days of the North Bay fire, nearly 1.5 million people used their mobile devices to visit our sites.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
Wow! You read a lot!
Reading enhances confidence, empathy, decision-making, and overall life satisfaction. Keep it up! Subscribe.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
Oops, you're out of free articles.
Until next month, you can always look over someone's shoulder at the coffee shop.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
We don't just cover the North Bay. We live here.
Did You Know? In the first 10 days of the North Bay fire, we posted 390 stories about the fire. And they were shared nearly 137,000 times.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
Supporting the community that supports us.
Obviously you value quality local journalism. Thank you.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
Oops, you're out of free articles.
We miss you already! (Subscriptions start at just 99 cents.)
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
X

The "Follow This Story" feature will notify you when any articles related to this story are posted.

When you follow a story, the next time a related article is published — it could be days, weeks or months — you'll receive an email informing you of the update.

If you no longer want to follow a story, click the "Unfollow" link on that story. There's also an "Unfollow" link in every email notification we send you.

This tool is available only to subscribers; please make sure you're logged in if you want to follow a story.

Login

X

Please note: This feature is available only to subscribers; make sure you're logged in if you want to follow a story.

LoginSubscribe

SAN FRANCISCO — Federal appeals court judges appeared skeptical Tuesday of the Trump administration's claim that courts don't have the power to review the president's decision to end a program that shields young immigrants from deportation.

Lawyers for both sides spent more than an hour arguing their cases about the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and answering questions from three judges of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California.

It's the first time a federal appeals court has heard arguments on the issue. About 40 DACA supporters gathered outside the courthouse, carrying signs that said "Immigrant rights are human rights" and "Our strength stems from our roots."

Judges focused on the administration's rationale for ending the program and whether they had authority to intervene rather than exploring the merits of allowing hundreds of thousands of young immigrants to remain in the U.S. under DACA.

The Trump administration has said it moved to end the program last year because Texas and other states threatened to sue, raising the prospect of a chaotic end to DACA.

Deputy Assistant Attorney General Hashim Mooppan argued Tuesday that the administration's decision could not be reviewed by courts, and he defended the move to end DACA against assertions that the decision was arbitrary and capricious.

"It's a question of an agency saying, 'We're not going to have a policy that might well be illegal,'" Mooppan told the judges. "That is a perfectly rationale thing to do."

The decision by Trump to end DACA prompted lawsuits across the nation, including one by the state of California.

A judge overseeing that suit and four others challenging DACA ruled against the administration and reinstated the program that was started by then-President Barack Obama.

The Trump administration now wants the 9th Circuit to throw out that ruling. It was not clear when the court would rule.

Ninth Circuit Judge Kim Wardlaw noted during the hearing that another appeals court had reviewed a similar Obama administration immigration policy.

Judge Jacqueline Nguyen questioned whether courts could intervene if they thought DACA was legal and disagreed with the administration's position that it was unconstitutional.

DACA has protected some 700,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families that overstayed visas.

In January, U.S. District Judge William Alsup rejected the argument that Obama had exceeded his power in creating DACA and said the Trump administration failed to consider the disruption that ending the program would cause.

Wardlaw seemed to agree, saying the acting Homeland Security secretary did not give "any weight" to the fact that DACA was in effect and participants were using it.

Michael Mongan, deputy solicitor general at the California Department of Justice, told the judges the administration had to explain why it believed DACA was unlawful and faced the risk of being invalidated by a court.

"They've got to show their homework," he said. "They haven't done that here."

Mooppan said the administration was under no obligation to consider the fact that people had come to rely on DACA.

Federal judges in New York and Washington, D.C., also have ruled against Trump on DACA.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is expected to hear arguments this summer on an appeal of the New York judge's ruling.

The ultimate fate of DACA likely rests in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Show Comment