Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California
What's at Stake
Whether the federal courts are precluded from reviewing the lawfulness of the federal government’s rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program under the Administrative Procedure Act because the decision is one that is “committed to agency discretion by law”?
Summary
The federal government contends that the plaintiffs’ legal challenge to the rescission of the DACA program cannot be reviewed by the federal courts because the decision involves an exercise of enforcement discretion that is unreviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act because it is “committed to agency discretion by law.” This amicus brief by Public Citizen, Natural Resources Defense Counsel, and ACLU argues that plaintiffs’ legal challenge is not precluded, because decades of federal court cases recognize that a general policy concerning enforcement or non-enforcement is judicially reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act.
Legal Documents
-
10/04/2019
ACLU, Public Citizen, NRDC SCOTUS Amicus Brief on DACA
Date Filed: 10/04/2019