Dreamers threaten to leave... Uhhh, ...Buh bye...

You are as full of shit as you are opinions. Originally Posted by bamscram

you're welcome!!!

there are 2 cases.

one was lead by the Texas distinct attorney, that one was suspended when Trump announced the DACA suspension and delayed its termination until March 2018. In that one, there was a good chance that the judge was going toss obama's DACA executive order into the trash can. I've not heard anything on that if the Judge will ignore the suspension and make a ruling.

the other was lead by the district attorneys of blue states saying DACA recipients were denied due process if DACA ends. a ridiculous claim. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

So, did either of them get heard yet? If so, when can we expect the court to rule?

I thought the 5th circuit tossed Obaminable's EO.

I thought the 5th circuit tossed Obaminable's EO. Originally Posted by LexusLover

that was the other EO, the predecessor to DACA, its the one for adults that got tossed out; Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA.

the supreme court upheld the 5th circuit by 4-4 decision.

So, did either of them get heard yet? If so, when can we expect the court to rule? Originally Posted by garhkal

yes.

DACA I got heard but is currently suspended.
DACA II currently being heard and working its way thru the courts. Courts placed an injunction on DACA application refusals.

that thing with DACA is ridiculous. If DAPA is unconstitutional due to it being an illegal executive order, it follows that DACA is too.

DACA is on thin ice and the blues know it!

Then lets HOPE THat mar 5th comes soon, and they don't make a last minute save of it.

that was the other EO, the predecessor to DACA, its the one for adults that got tossed out; Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA.

the supreme court upheld the 5th circuit by 4-4 decision. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Wasn't it tossed on a lack of authority in the POTUS?

I'm going to find that 5th circuit case.

Technically a "tie" doesn't uphold it just leaves the circuit case in effect. The opinion reveals the "potential" decision making for the Justices who voted on either side. That's of interest now and in the near future, but only academically.

FYI:

In the paper “Ties in the Supreme Court of the United States,” published in the William & Mary Law Review, Edward Hartnett writes:

The traditional practice of the Supreme Court of the United States is that “no affirmative action can be had in a cause where the judges are equally divided in opinion as to the judgment to be rendered or order to be made.

That blurb is a cursory look, but there is a long history of the same.

Ginsberg's recent political comments may have disqualified her from hearing any Trump cases.

The Chief Justice would speak on it.