//  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.

Religious Discrimination And Racial Discrimination

6/30/20  //  Quick Reactions

The Court’s decision in Espinoza is similar to the trajectory of the law of racial discrimination in some respects, it also offers a striking contrast in others

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School

The DACA Decision is Trouble for Discrimination Law

6/24/20  //  Commentary

The Dreamers’ victory has been celebrated as a sign that the Court is above partisanship and willing to serve as a check on executive branch abuses. But the price of that victory was a defeat for the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection.

Jessica Clarke

Vanderbilt Law School

Deferred Reaction To the Courts

6/22/20  //  Commentary

Democratic and Republican responses to the DACA decision illustrate the different focus the two parties put on the federal courts.

Leah Litman

Michigan Law School