Subsequent Trump and Court Action(s)

• June 18, 2020

  Supreme Court DACA Decision

  On June 18, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the DACA rescission was an unlawful violation of the APA. DHS v. Regents of the University of California, Case. No. 18-587.
  
  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• July 28, 2020

  Reconsideration of the June 15, 2012 Memo Entitled "Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children"

  Rather than reinstating DACA following the Supreme Court’s order, DHS issued a new memo signed by Undersecretary of Homeland Security for Strategy, Policy, and Plans Chad Wolf in his role as Acting Secretary: “I have concluded that the DACA policy, at a minimum, presents serious policy concerns that may warrant its full rescission.” Wolf directed “DHS personnel to take all appropriate actions to reject all pending and future initial requests for DACA,” and limited DACA beneficiaries may to one-year renewals rather than two.

  After the Wolf memo, USCIS Deputy Director for Policy Joseph Edlow issued an implementing memo on August 21, 2020, ordering inter alia that the component "[r]eject all initial DACA requests and associated applications for Employment Authorization Document" and categorically reject advance parole applications. See https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-alerts/dacamemo.pdf

  View Document
• December 4, 2020

  E.D.N.Y. Order in Batalla-Vidal

  The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York ordered DHS to “post a public notice, within 3 calendar days . . . that it is accepting first-time requests for consideration of deferred action under DACA," covering renewals and advance parole requests as well. The court had earlier held that Wolf's memo exceeded his authority as he was not legally appointed Acting Secretary of DHS.

  View Document
• July 16, 2021

  Texas v. US opinion

  Judge Hanen of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas rules that DACA was an improper exercise of agency authority, because the normal “notice and comment” process for adopting new rules was not followed. The court orders USCIS to cease adjudicating new applications and granted summary judgment on plaintiffs’ Administrative Procedure Act (APA) claims. It vacated the June 15, 2012 DACA memorandum issued by former Secretary of Homeland Security Napolitano; remanded the memorandum to DHS for further consideration; and issued a permanent injunction prohibiting the government’s continued administration of DACA and the reimplementation of DACA without compliance with the APA. The Court, however, temporarily stayed its order vacating the DACA memorandum and its injunction for individuals who obtained DACA on or before July 16, 2021, including those with renewal requests.

  The Biden administration issued a statement calling the decision "deeply disappointing" and encouraging Congress to act. See https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/07/17/statement-by-president-joe-biden-on-daca-and-legislation-for-dreamers/. "The Department of Justice intends to appeal this decision in order to preserve and fortify DACA. And, as the court recognized, the Department of Homeland Security plans to issue a proposed rule concerning DACA in the near future."

  View Document