Re:U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native Americ...
by twsttest on Thursday July 09, 2020 @01:59PM
(#23783043)
However DACA itself is unlawful in that it is an Executive Order undermining Federal immigration law, so the administration's rescinding it on the basis of its unlawfulness should be sufficient enough justification. The problem is that the Court's ruling indicates that an EO which subverts existing law cannot be overturned by subsequent administrations simply on the basis of its illegality. Justice Thomas' dissent says exactly this.
That's incredibly problematic. According to the recent ruling therefore, a President has the power to issue and EO which prevents the enforcement of certain laws.
Re:U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native Americ...
by brandmeyer on Thursday July 09, 2020 @03:56PM
(#23784377)
I urge you to read the SCOTUS opinion itself, and not just the rhetoric you may have heard in the media about the opinion. Because this:
> According to the recent ruling therefore, a President has the power to issue and EO which prevents the enforcement of certain laws
is flatly untrue.
It didn't rule that the current administration can't undo the program, it ruled that the administration has to properly justify that decision, and not doing so is unlawful.
At no point did it rule on DACA itself, or prevent the administration from providing actual, motivated and legal reasoning for rescinding the program.
Also
> This was his dissent on DACA.
Which corresponds to the majority ruling on this case, yet I can't help but notice Gorsuch joined the liberal justices in the majority, not Thomas.