TO CLOSE

A Federal Court of Appeal has ruled against the action of President Trump's government to end the DACA, which protects undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children.
UNITED STATES TODAY & # 39; HUI

Protesters are asking for DACA (Deferred Action for Child Arrivals) protection outside the office of Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., In Los Angeles in January.(Photo: Reed Saxon, AP)

WASHINGTON – A federal court of appeal said Thursday that President Donald Trump could not end an Obama administration program that protects undocumented immigrants brought to the United States while they were children.

A panel of the US Court of Appeals of the 9th Circuit endorsed the decision of a federal district judge in January that Trump did not have the power to eliminate the program. proposal made by the president last year in the hope of urging Congress to act.

"Complainants are most likely to argue that the cancellation of the DACA – at least in the cases justified in these minutes – is arbitrary, capricious or contrary to law," said the three-member tribunal .

"In a world where the government can only eliminate a small percentage of undocumented non-citizens present in this country in a given year," said the group, DACA let it "devote essential resources to control priorities such as threats to national security". irreproachable and economically productive young people with a clean criminal record ".

The ruling leaves for now the deferred action program for child arrivals, known as DACA, which has protected more than 700,000 undocumented immigrants from deportation and their allowed to obtain work permits.

The court noted that this organization was created because of the "cruelty and waste of expelling productive youth to countries with whom they had no connection".

The Ministry of Justice is likely to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, which has five reliable conservative judges. In February, the High Court refused to skip the review of Judge William Alsup's decision by the Court of Appeal.

"In California and across the country, the Dreamers are significantly enriching our communities as researchers, entrepreneurs, first responders and more," said California Attorney General Xavier Becerra. "This fight, of course, is far from over – we will continue to defend Dreamers and DACA until the Supreme Court if necessary."

Dan Stein, president of the Conservative Federation for American Immigration Reform, decried the judgment. "The Supreme Court must put this case at the top of the list," he said.

Two other federal appeal courts are examining the dispute between the Trump administration and states, local governments, and immigrant rights groups competing to keep the program alive.

Sanaa Abrar, Advocacy Director for United We Dream, a youth-led immigration advocacy group, predicted that these decisions would come to the same conclusion.

"Another federal court said what we always knew: Trump's decision to kill DACA was false and his only motivation was to expel 800,000 people of color," Abrar said in a statement.

The opinion reverses an argument often put forward by the Trump administration: the DACA was an unconstitutional "end" around the Congress, which repeatedly blocked the DREAM law. The measure was introduced in 2001 but has never been adopted by both chambers.

The action to safeguard the DACA was initiated by the University of California, which issued a statement in which it urged the Trump administration to give up its efforts to cancel the program and Congress to adopt permanent protection measures.

"Although today 's decision is good news, we emphasize that DACA recipients deserve better than to see their future prospects increase and decrease depending on events occurring in the future. litigation course ", says the release of the university.

In its decision, the 9th circuit emphasized that the two policies provide very different forms of relief. DACA grants protection against expulsion; the DREAM law would confer legal permanent residence, which leads to US citizenship.

To reach its conclusion, the 9th Circuit's decision explored more than 100 years of presidential administrations deciding that not all laws should be enforced 100% of the time and that not all people should be punished for every violation.

The report cited President Ronald Reagan's decision to protect relatives of undocumented immigrants amnestied by amnesty in 1986 and President Dwight Eisenhower's decision to protect more than 30,000 Hungarian refugees in 1956. He found 19 other examples of important groups of foreigners protected from deportation.

The court even cited the case of John Lennon and Yoko Ono, who had been almost deported under the charge of possession of marijuana in Britain, but allowed to remain in the United States as they were not allowed to stay in the United States. were not priority in the matter of deportation.

More: What the democratic renewal of the House means for Trump's immigration program

More: The caravan of immigrants arrives in Mexico, pauses to regroup

More: Trump asks for new limits for asylum applications while he pushes the issue of immigration before mid-term

Read or share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/11/08/daca-feased-appeals-court-blocks-trocks-trump-administration-ending-program/1931643002/