Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California
Whether the the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy judicially reviewable; and whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy lawful.Advocates
- Noel J. Francisco, for the petitioners
- Theodore B. Olson, for the private respondents
- Michael J. Mongan, for the state respondents
In the first question, Justice Alito poses a hypothetical to illustrate that not all non-enforcement policies (or retractions of non-enforcement policies) are judicially reviewable. That requires respondents to identify a theory about why the rescission of DACA in particular is judicially reviewable. The question comes up several times throughout the argument (including a follow-up by Chief Justice Roberts), illustrating its importance to the Justices.
In the second question, Justice Gorsuch asks the respondents about what value there would be to forcing the agency to “redo” the decision to rescind DACA when there is little doubt that the government is committed to rescinding DACA and the respondents have conceded that the government could rescind DACA if it did so lawfully. Several Justices (including Justice Kavanagh) returned to this idea as well during the argument.Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California on Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/18-587