//  1/18/18  //  Commentary

On a new episode of Versus Trump, Easha, Jason, and Charlie discuss the big decision that forced the Trump Administration to restart the DACA immigration program. As usual, you can listen online below, and subscribe here with any podcast player or here in iTunes.

They begin the discussion by summarizing the lawsuit over the revocation of DACA. They then to turn four buckets of issues in the district court's two opinions (here, ordering the Administration to restore DACA, and here, denying in part the government's motion to dismiss). For buckets one and two, they discuss whether DACA is a decision that is "committed to agency discretion" or whether it's a broad policy, and then they delve into the Administration's argument that it had to revoke DACA because the Obama Administration's creation of the program was illegal. They then [at 35:00] move on to buckets three and four and talk about whether this revocation was motivated by discrimination and whether DACA recipients should be able to argue that the government cannot revoke the program because they've already relied on it.

You can find us at @VersusTrumpPod on twitter, or send us an email at versustrumppodcast@gmail.com. And you can buy t-shirts and other goods with our super-cool logo here.

Links

  • Judge Alsup issued two opinions in the case called Regents of the University of California v. US Dep't of Homeland Security. The first is here, and it orders the Administration to restore DACA. The second is here, and it denied in part the government's motion to dismiss.
  • Zach Price's commentary on Take Care is here.
  • An October post at Balkinization by Adam Cox, Marty Lederman, and Cristina Rodriguez that summarizes the revocation and outlines the "arbitrary and capricious" argument the court followed is here.
  • The latest on the government's plan to appeal directly to the Supreme Court is here.

Race, Class, and Challenges to Abortion Restrictions

5/17/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

Race and class are intricately entwined with laws like the Hyde Amendment, and no advocacy on the issue can ignore this fact

David S. Cohen

Thomas R. Kline School of Law

Key Context for Trump's Rhetoric About Immigrants

5/17/19  //  In-Depth Analysis

President Trump's rhetoric draw upon a familiar narrative that pathologizes immigration and immigrant reproduction as a threat while protecting and supporting the nation’s “good” mothers, families, and neighborhood

Yvonne Lindgren

UCSF Law School

Versus Trump: Trump Loses On Family Planning, Wins In The Ninth, and More

5/16/19  //  Uncategorized

This week on Versus Trump, Jason and Easha go through a few updates to cases involving Title X, which provides money for family planning; the Administration's policy to have many asylum applicants removed to Mexico; and the controversial border wall. Trump lost one, won one—for now, and hasn't yet gotten a decision in the third. Listen now!

Jason Harrow

Equal Citizens

Easha Anand

San Francisco