Supreme Court 2020s: on Immigration

Ketanji Brown Jackson: Trump administration set asylum seeking standards too high

Ketanji Brown Jackson: Due process for immigrants regardless of legal status

Neil Gorsuch: Allow access to relief in deportation proceedings

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, adopting a rigid interpretation of a federal statute that requires the government to serve a "notice to appear" in order to trigger the "stop-time" rule. That rule can foreclose access to immigration relief by preventing noncitizens from accruing the time required for eligibility.

The voting line-up was unusual. Gorsuch's majority opinion was joined by the court's three liberals--Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan--as well as two other conservatives--Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a dissent, which was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito.

Antonin Scalia: DACA phase-out legally correct under administrative law

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The 5-4 ruling emphasized that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program.

Clarence Thomas wrote in a dissent, that Scalia joined, that the ruling is "an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision. The majority makes the mystifying determination that this rescission of DACA was unlawful. The majority acts as though it is engaging in the routine application of standard principles of administrative law. This is anything but a standard administrative law case."

Barack Obama: DACA recipients make America's shared ideals

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

Former President Barack Obama weighed in on the decision on Twitter, writing of DACA recipients: "Today, I'm happy for them, their families, and all of us. We may look different and come from everywhere, but what makes us American are our shared ideals," Obama wrote, noting the program was created eight years ago this week.

Brett Kavanaugh: DACA phase-out legally correct under administrative law

Justice Kavanaugh wrote a separate dissent praising immigrants, but saying he did not agree with the majority opinion. "They live, go to school, & work here with uncertainty about their futures. Despite many attempts over the last two decades, Congress has not yet enacted legislation to afford legal status to those immigrants," Kavanaugh wrote. He noted that "the only practical consequence of the Court's decision to remand appears to be some delay" because the decision allows "the Department to relabel and reiterate substance."

Clarence Thomas: DACA phase-out legally correct under administrative law

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The 5-4 ruling emphasized that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program.

In his dissent, Thomas wrote that the decision is "an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision. The majority makes the mystifying determination that this rescission of DACA was unlawful. In reaching that conclusion, the majority acts as though it is engaging in the routine application of standard principles of administrative law. On the contrary, this is anything but a standard administrative law case."

Donald Trump: DACA phase-out legally correct but politically controversial

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The 5-4 ruling emphasized that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program.

After the ruling was handed down, Trump retweeted a tweet featuring Justice Clarence Thomas' dissent. The decision is "an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision," Thomas wrote. Thomas argued in his dissent that "the majority makes the mystifying determination that this rescission of DACA was unlawful. On the contrary, this is anything but a standard administrative law case."

Elena Kagan: DACA protect childhood immigrants from deportation

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

The 5-4 ruling was written by Chief Justice Roberts and joined by Kagan, emphasizing that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program. Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. "'The wisdom of those decisions 'is none of our concern.' We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action."

Jeff Sessions: DACA program was created without proper authority

After Trump came into office, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the program had been created "without proper authority" and only after Congress had rejected proposed legislation. The following day, DHS announced DACA would be phased out, pointing out that it had "legal and constitutional defects."

Months later, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen issued a new memo laying out more policy-based justifications for winding down the program. She said, for example, that the program increased the risk of undermining public confidence in the rule of law.

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

Joe Biden: Make DACA permanent; much work remains to be done

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden also celebrated the ruling, calling it a "victory" and again saying that if elected, he will work "immediately" on legislation that would make the program permanent. "The joy of today's victory does not erase the difficult road ahead," Biden said in a statement. "We know that much work remains to be done."

John Roberts: DACA protect childhood immigrants from deportation

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

The 5-4 ruling was written by Chief Justice Roberts, who wrote in the majority opinion. "'The wisdom of those decisions 'is none of our concern.' We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action." >The ruling emphasizes that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program.

Kirstjen Nielsen: DACA program undermines confidence in rule of law

After Trump came into office, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the program had been created "without proper authority" and only after Congress had rejected proposed legislation. The following day, DHS announced DACA would be phased out, pointing out that it had "legal and constitutional defects."

Months later, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen issued a new memo laying out more policy-based justifications for winding down the program. She said, for example, that the program increased the risk of undermining public confidence in the rule of law.

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg: DACA protect childhood immigrants from deportation

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

The 5-4 ruling was written by Chief Justice Roberts and joined by Ginsburg, emphasizing that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program. Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. "'The wisdom of those decisions 'is none of our concern.' We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action."

Samuel Alito: DACA phase-out legally correct; politics is not our business

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The 5-4 ruling emphasized that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program.

Justice Alito seemed wrote in his dissent that "DACA presents a delicate political issue, but that is not our business. As Justice Thomas explains, DACA was unlawful from the start, and tha

Sonia Sotomayor: DACA protect childhood immigrants from deportation

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

The 5-4 ruling was written by Chief Justice Roberts and joined by Sotomayor, emphasizing that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program. Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. "'The wisdom of those decisions 'is none of our concern.' We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action."

Stephen Breyer: DACA protect childhood immigrants from deportation

Federal courts said the administration had acted arbitrarily when phasing out the program. The courts pointed to the administration's thin justification--reasoning Roberts and the Supreme Court eventually agreed with.

The 5-4 ruling was written by Chief Justice Roberts and joined by Breyer, emphasizing that the administration failed to provide an adequate reason to justify ending the DACA program. Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. "'The wisdom of those decisions 'is none of our concern.' We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action."