That didn’t take long. But does anyone know on what grounds the suit(s) is based?
I think each State would have standing based upon economic impacts possibly affecting each respective one …
Why no California??
Wow, I hadn’t noticed that. And California’s the state that will be most effected.
The states with the most potential beneficiaries are California (539,774), Texas (298,133), Florida (106,481), New York (88,889), and Illinois (83,088).
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/who-and-where-dreamers-are-revised-estimates
Seems odd that Florida is also MIA, considering that its governor and premier Medicare fraudster spoke out against rescinding DACA.
Maryland’s Attorney General needs to sign onto this suit as well.
From the article: “violates due process rights”.
Sounds like they’re going to argue it’s an arbitrary and capricious change. Citizens (not sure about non-citizens) have something called a right of government reliance (at least that’s what we called it at the EPA).
Suppose you’re a homeowner who obtained a building permit, then after having spent $150,000 toward a building expansion, the government comes along on Monday and says, oh so sorry, we changed our minds. You have to tear down everything you did and forfeit the expense. That would clearly be wrong. You have to be able to rely on what the government tells you when you make plans for your life, commit money, and so on.
Basically, Dreamers were granted an exemption to immigration enforcement (not to the laws, just to their enforcement). They would have relied on that exemption in planning their education, careers, and so on. Now that exemption is stripped away without a hearing and without opportunity for public comment. But I’m not sure this argument will prevail, since the law itself hasn’t changed and the right of government reliance may not cover extensions to exemptions from laws. They’re also non-citizens and I’m not sure what due-process rights non-citizens have. They probably do have some, but it wouldn’t be surprising if they have fewer rights than citizens in this regard.
Well, Mr. Commander-in-Cheat, still think it’s all gonna be “happiness”, that “everything will work out fine?”
Doofus.
Glad my state of Oregon is suing.
A bit more:
The suit, filed in New York, accuses the administration of violating the Administrative Procedure Act and the due process and equal protection clauses of the Constitution.
IANAL (only got as far as passing the LSAT), but it’s my understanding that an ancient principle in common law, the Code Napoléon, etc., gives legal rights and privileges to persons, based on long-term use, even if they’re not otherwise entitled to it (e.g. adverse possession, continuous trespassers’ rights, prescriptive easements, squatting, nonpossessory property interest).
Might there be a legal argument one could make for Dreamers (or even for their parents), based on this principle, given their long-term use of American soil and privileges?
Administrative procedure requires public review and comment periods for changes to agency rules (i.e., regulations) before they can be promulgated. Is there an agency regulation involved here? I think not, but I could be wrong about that.
Yes, they will make due process and equal protection arguments. Those constitutional arguments are not limited to protecting US citizens, but cover anyone under US jurisdiction.
Can you see them in court …
telling a judge they are ’ grandfathered ’ in ? ? … 
Interesting idea, but I’d guess not. You have to have been trespassing without permission to gain right-of-way. If the owner grants you permission, they can withdraw that permission at any time without you having obtained further rights. That’s my understanding at least. Super counter-intuitive, which is why I remembered it.
California might join later (or might not). I’d guess the AG is reviewing the case and applicable laws to decide if it has enough chance in court to be a good use of state funds.
"The plaintiffs were New York, Massachusetts, Washington, Connecticut,
Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, New Mexico,
North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and
Virginia."
A bit surprised that the Keystone State weighed in on the side of sanity.
Read today in both WaPo and LA Times that California AG is preparing to file a separate lawsuit because our state is disproportionately harmed by terminating DACA. Similar arguments to the joint lawsuit, AG Becerra says. WaPo: California to file separate suit on immigration protections
@tiowally @clunkertruck @cabchi @lestatdelc @antaresting @outsidertrading618 @irasdad @twowolves
How fortunate we are that the red-state AGs like Pruitt(the current OK one is Michael Hunter per wiki) tend to be AGs because they’re bought-and-paid-for hacks, but the Becerras from blue states are AGs because they want to look out for the citizens’ interests. And they’re smarter.