That's us, not him:
The government's argument seems to boil down to "the program was instituted by that Muslim illegal immigrant Obama."
Via Joe.My.God.
A third federal judge has rejected the Trump administration’s justification for winding down the program protecting immigrants who came to the U.S. illegally as children.
U.S. District Court Judge John Bates said on Tuesday that the Department of Homeland Security’s legal explanation for the decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, was too flimsy and, ultimately, unpersuasive.
“DACA’s rescission was arbitrary and capricious because the Department failed adequately to explain its conclusion that the program was unlawful,” Bates wrote in his 60-page opinion, released on Tuesday evening. “Neither the meager legal reasoning nor the assessment of litigation risk provided by DHS to support its rescission decision is sufficient to sustain termination of the DACA program.”
. . .
Bates is also opening up the possibility that the Trump administration could be ordered to take new DACA applications, something no other judge has required. Bates said in his decision on Tuesday that if DHS didn’t come up with a new, better explanation for the rescission within 90 days, the entire program would be restored.
The government's argument seems to boil down to "the program was instituted by that Muslim illegal immigrant Obama."
Via Joe.My.God.
No comments:
Post a Comment