Supreme Court appears inclined to let Trump end DACA program

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,376]

Trump has said all long if they give him border security he will take care of the dreamers.  Lets fix the border. Fix our absurd asylum laws.  Implement a fair immigration policy. I dont have a bit of problem with letting those that have made a life here stay

 

 

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-appears-inclined-let-trump-end-daca-program-n1080796

[Dashinka 24,602]

Why is this even in the court?  DACA was created by EO, and it can be ended by EO.  If we set the precedent that EO's are permanent law, it is another step toward a dictator.

 

As @Nature Boy 2.0 said, President Trump said he would negotiate, but Congress has to act (wow, I thought Trump was a dictator, but he seems to be following the Constitution), I wonder if they will?  They seem to be a little pre-occupied at the moment.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

14 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Why is this even in the court?  DACA was created by EO, and it can be ended by EO.  If we set the precedent that EO's are permanent law, it is another step toward a dictator.

 

As @Nature Boy 2.0 said, President Trump said he would negotiate, but Congress has to act (wow, I thought Trump was a dictator, but he seems to be following the Constitution), I wonder if they will?  They seem to be a little pre-occupied at the moment.

The hill was talking today about the whole impeachment fiasco and it may take up to 4 months of Congressmen/women working 6 days a week on this before it's completely done. That it certainly won't allow any room for anything else to get done in Congress before the election season starts

[USS_Voyager 1,972]

25 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

The hill was talking today about the whole impeachment fiasco and it may take up to 4 months of Congressmen/women working 6 days a week on this before it's completely done. That it certainly won't allow any room for anything else to get done in Congress before the election season starts

Exactly, nothing will happen until the whole impeachment thing is over, which they're talking about Christmas for the impeachment vote in the House if impeached, the trial in the Senate which will be another several months. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Keeping up the impeachment scam for a few months keeps things like DACA and Epstein's late-term abortion out of the MSM.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

On 11/13/2019 at 9:56 AM, Bill & Katya said:

Why is this even in the court?  DACA was created by EO, and it can be ended by EO.  If we set the precedent that EO's are permanent law, it is another step toward a dictator.

The reason why it was in court has to do with whether or not the EO created a program on which recipients reasonably relied that they would receive a benefit. Withdrawal of the benefit -- if one does exist -- cannot be arbitrary and capricious, and lower courts have found that the withdrawal was not based on policy reasons. It was ended purely by dictat. The question has become, by my understanding, not whether an executive order may necessarily be ended by an executive order, but rather whether this EO has created a program that has risen beyond that, so that simply saying "it's illegal so bye, Felicia" isn't enough here. Trump arguably furthered this expectation by telling DACA recipients they were safe under him -- yet then ended the program. In my opinion, this could go either way. I wouldn't bet in either direction.

[Dashinka 24,602]

2 hours ago, elmcitymaven said:

The reason why it was in court has to do with whether or not the EO created a program on which recipients reasonably relied that they would receive a benefit. Withdrawal of the benefit -- if one does exist -- cannot be arbitrary and capricious, and lower courts have found that the withdrawal was not based on policy reasons. It was ended purely by dictat. The question has become, by my understanding, not whether an executive order may necessarily be ended by an executive order, but rather whether this EO has created a program that has risen beyond that, so that simply saying "it's illegal so bye, Felicia" isn't enough here. Trump arguably furthered this expectation by telling DACA recipients they were safe under him -- yet then ended the program. In my opinion, this could go either way. I wouldn't bet in either direction.

Thanks for the analysis, but how does that square with any President simply creating a law by EO if SCOTUS upholds DACA?  I know a lot of folks like to call President Trump a budding dictator, but in my mind he has the right idea, Congress has to act to make this truly legal, and he has made overtures to Congress about taking care of this mess, so far, it has been inaction.  I agree though, trying to determine how the Court will decide at this point is a big gamble, it could go either way, but to me if they maintain DACA, it could set a bad Constitutional precedent.