Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Guys, here is all the information you guys need to know about todays court case

TEXAS V. UNITED STATES
Dec 21, 2020 | DACA, Immigrants' Rights

What is Texas v. United States?

It is a challenge to the legality of DACA by nine states led by Texas.

Which states are challenging DACA?

Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Carolina, and West Virginia.

What is Texas v. United States challenging about DACA?

Texas v. United States is different from the cases related to the Trump administration’s attempted rescission of DACA; Texas v. U.S. attacks the legality of DACA and seeks a ruling that the original 2012 DACA memo is unlawful, whether or not there is a president who wants to implement it.

When did this challenge start?

Texas filed this case in 2018 and sought an immediate order striking down DACA. However, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen denied the motion for preliminary injunction, concluding that the plaintiff states could not demonstrate an urgency after waiting six years to file suit.

What is MALDEF’s involvement in this case?

Although the federal government is the named defendant in this case, the Trump administration has refused to defend DACA and has argued in Texas v. United States that DACA is unlawful. As a result, the defense of DACA in court is being led by 22 DACA recipients who intervened in the case. MALDEF represents these DACA recipients along with the law firm of Ropes & Gray LLP. The State of New Jersey also intervened in the case as a defendant.

Where do things stand now?

The case is now at the pre-trial stage. Both sides have asked the Court to resolve the case without a trial (also known as a request for summary judgment). The DACA recipients have asked Judge Hanen to dismiss the case because the plaintiff states cannot point to any injuries resulting from DACA, financial or otherwise. Without injury, the plaintiff states lack the requisite “standing” to bring suit and the court lacks jurisdiction over the case. The plaintiff states have also asked Judge Hanen to decide the case without a trial and to declare DACA unlawful.

What arguments do Texas and the other states make?

They have two arguments:

DACA should have been instituted through federal regulations, not a memorandum;
DACA is inconsistent with federal immigration law because the Immigration and Nationality Act does not provide immigration status to DREAMERS;
What’s next?

Both sides will argue their motions for summary judgment at a hearing in Houston, TX on December 22, 2020. There are four possible outcomes of the summary judgment motions:

The court agrees with the defendant-interveners and dismisses the case because the plaintiffs cannot show any injury from DACA.
The court decides that the issues need further development and sets the case for trial, denying both motions for summary judgment.
The court reaches the question of DACA’s legality and decides DACA is lawful.
The court reaches the question of DACA’s legality and decides DACA is not lawful.
What happens to DACA if the judge decides in favor of Texas and the states?

Even if the court rules invalid the 2012 memo that established DACA, all parties in the case agree that DACA should continue in the near future while the court considers appropriate remedy. A new presidential administration will also consider next steps for DACA, which may affect the future of this case.







https://www.maldef.org/2020/12/texas-v-united-states/

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Thanks for posting

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

@joshgerstein
Judge Hanen starts off #DACA hearing by saying people shouldn't take offense at use of terms illegal alien or illegal immigrant at today's hearing. 'While it may not sound or be politically correct in today’s parlance, popular parlance, it does apply here in a certain context.'

@TomJawetz
The issue here is whether the states have standing to challenge DACA and whether there’s any reason to accept as expert testimony the report of an economist who said DACA will have various labor market, economic effects necessary for the states’ claims of injury.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Yikes if that’s how Hanen is starting.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Cameron Langford
@cam_langford
Hanen asks, "What do I do with the fact that in theory if there's no DACA, all the DACA recipients are illegal immigrants and they should be removed under the INA [Immigration and Nationality Act]?"

https://mobile.twitter.com/cam_langf...22850549399553

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Too late for that and he seems aware it's not as easy as he wanted it to be by theorizing.

I wonder if he has the power of granting DACAers GCs as a repair of injury if he strikes down the program.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Ayo this dude just called us illegal immigrants yo, dude is mad disrespectful bee

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Reading the twitter thread. Not looking good

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

@TomJawetz
NJ argues that since the SJ motion was filed circumstances have changed significantly. Easiest approach has to be to pause the case and seek a status update once the presidential transition is done. This court did that in DAPA and should do it today.

@TomJawetz
NJ now reiterating Nina Perales’ earlier point—if Texas has beef w/ DACA recipients getting AP and EADs, Texas can challenge the statute and reg that make those benefits available to DACA recipients.

But challenging DACA means challenging the discretionary decision to grant DA.

- NJ points out that when Napolitano observed that DACA recipients can apply for AP and EADs she was simply noting what would be available to DACA recipients based upon separate, preexisting law. If she’d wanted to cut DACA recipients off from those benefits she could have.

-Very nice distinction NJ is drawing between the earlier Fifth Circuit decision on DAPA and the current motion at the SJ stage when there’s evidence of individualized, discretionary determinations.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Conversation

Juan Lozano
@juanlozano70
DACA hearing is over in Houston after about 3 1/2 hours of legal discussions. As expected, federal Judge Andrew Hanen did not issue an immediate ruling on the fate of DACA. He will issue a ruling at a later date.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Whoever this Nina perales person is she was on fire with the arguments

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

He's had plenty of time to think, consider, and weigh both sides. Waiting to issue a ruling just sounds like he takes pleasure in leaving everyone dreading the worst. I wish to be pleasantly surprised...

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

He ended dapa so swiftly. Stalling means he’s hesitating to end daca which is good for us

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

I hope you're right!

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Guys even Texas was arguing for a 2 year wind down for daca and not an immediate end. We’re good this is all a bunch of bullshit

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

You’re joking right? He took a few weeks and then gutted it the day before it was to go into effect.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Can the ruling be appealed regardless it’s in favor or against Daca? can there be contradicting ruling from other court?

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

There was a whole court case that went all the way to SCOTUS. He put a temporary injunction that halted the program the day before it took effect.

Texas was asking for an injunction nearly 2 years ago which Hanen denied. Now Texas is arguing for a slow wind down of 2 years.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Not a good sign, Judge just don't want to rule agains DACA two days before Christmas, that would make him look too cold and mean! If he was to rule in favor it would've made sense to do it right away because of the timing! However I honestly don't know which direction would be better for us at this point.
If DACA wins, there's no incentive or urgency for congress to act. At the end we'll be safe either way!
we're approaching 10 years of DACA. that's enough, time to upgrade us to at least GCs.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

There had been many incentives for Congress in the past, don't count on them. Let's hope for favorable ruling.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

Looking good

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

There were bills going around when daca first expired before the courts kept it alive. It nearly passed the senate but Miller killed it.

Re: Texas Lawsuit FAQs
 

so will there be another hearing or he'll issue a decision soon?