Second US Appeals Court Rules Trump Cannot End Protections for ‘Dreamers’

A U.S. appeals court ruled on Friday that President Donald Trump cannot end a program that shielded from deportation immigrants brought into the country illegally as children, the second time the administration has lost an appeal on the issue.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, said in its ruling that the 2017 rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program violated administrative law because the policy change was not adequately explained.

The ruling reversed a decision by a federal court in Maryland, and sent the case back for further proceedings.

The Department of Justice declined to comment.

Republican Trump’s Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, began DACA in 2012. It shielded a group of immigrants known as “Dreamers” and has given them work permits but not a path to citizenship. About 800,000 people, mostly Hispanics, have received DACA protection.

Trump has taken a stern stance against illegal immigration. His administration announced plans in September 2017 to phase out DACA, arguing that Obama exceeded his constitutional powers when he bypassed Congress and created the program.

Rights groups, states and individuals filed numerous lawsuits against the Trump administration over the decision to end the program. A series of lower courts have generally ruled against the government, leaving DACA in place for now.

The appeals court in Virginia found by a 2-1 decision that the rescission of DACA was arbitrary and capricious and violated administrative law.

Judge Robert King, appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton, and Judge Albert Diaz, appointed by Obama, formed the majority. Judge Julius Richardson, who was appointed by Trump, dissented.

A similar decision was reached by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in November, which upheld a lower court injunction against ending the program.

The Supreme Court currently has three Trump administration appeals pending that seek to revive the administration’s DACA proposal but the justices have so far delayed acting on them. It is likely the conservative-leaning court will ultimately have the final say on the issue.

On Thursday, Trump unveiled a proposed overhaul of the U.S. immigration system to favor educated English speakers over people with family ties to Americans, a plan he will push in his 2020 re-election campaign.

But the plan did not include protections for ‘Dreamers,’ a sticking point for Democratic lawmakers who say a permanent fix for this group of immigrants must be part of any proposed policy changes.

(Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware; additional reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by Jonathan Oatis)


  1. although I feel bad for these kids, they were part of their parents illegal acts, however, if congress is supposed to be in charge of changing immigration laws then obama had no right to make DACA a law in the first place by bypassing congress and using an executive order. so why is it not in the boundaries of the current president to rescind that executive order?

  2. This is a load of BS, if these “dreamers” were so eager to stay in this country, WHY are they not moving towards citizenship??? DEPORT them all!!

  3. Our right to self defense and defense of our families needs to be executed upon the corrupt federal judiciary and any law maker(s) who propose or approve any legislation in conflict with our Constitution. Perhaps another American Revolution is in order?

  4. Someone please explain to me why an executive order that was an end-run around Congress cannot be rescinded by a second executive order.

  5. SCOTUS is the answer other than shipping them out.

  6. Trump should just ignore these socialist courts and issue another Exec Order …. If they were put in effect by Ex Order they can be removed by Exec Order.

  7. “program violated administrative law because the policy change was not adequately explained” How does a reversal of an admittedly illegal (by Obama) EA violate administrative law? It’s not a law, it was an ILLEGAL Executive Action. These courts are definitely out of control.

  8. Obama put the DACA protection program into effect by Executive Order. By precedent & past practices, an Executive Order is only in effect while the President who issued it is in office. After that, any future President can either keep it in place or end it. Since this has ALWAYS been the way Executive Orders work, the courts have no legal right to force a President to keep a past President’s Executive Order.
    Yet again this shows that the liberal federal courts are going far beyond the scope & description of power given to them by the Constitution. The Judicial Branch of our government must be brought back to its limited powers as defined by the constitution or it will no longer be a co-equal branch of the federal government, but become the head of the government by being able to over-rule both the Legislative & Executive branches on any item its sees fit, thereby effectively changing our country from a Constitutional Republic to an Oligarchy = rule by a select group of people who, for the most part, are appointed, not elected.
    These liberal courts are effectively writing or rewriting laws & precedents, which is supposed to be the job of Congress according to our Constitution. Both Congress & the Executive branch (President) must get the federal courts back into line with the Constitution.

  9. Obama knew what he did was illegal, stated such, and yet he did it and judges are legislating (or trying to) from the bench. Judges that do this should be removed from the bench. They are being politicians and not judges that are to uphold the law.

  10. Would like to know how these black robe terrorists justify keeping an administrative law that Obama enacted as President and not allow the current President the ability to end it through the same administrative process? Can’t have it both ways. Administrative law is not a legislative law. Any 1st year law student know its and shows these black robe terrorists are purely making up law on their own perverted whims.

    1. Federal judges are appointed for life (actually state as “during good behavior”). Generally the only way to remove a Federal judge would be through retirement (like that would ever happen), health issues, or the usual procedure is that they are appointed to a higher court.

      The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should be considered a “Republican” court as there are 10 judges appointed by Republican Presidents and 9 appointed by demoncrap Presidents, 6 of which were appointed by Obozo and 3 by Clinton. Only 3 have been appointed by President Trump and the others were appointed by the Bushes so they may not be all that supportive of President Trump.

    2. One of the most liberal judges ever on the Supreme Court was Hugo Black of Alabama during the Warren Court era. Ironically, he had been a member of the Ku Klux Klan. ‘They used to say that “Hugo used to wear a white robe and scare black people, now he wears a black robe and scares white people.”
      That is funny no matter what ‘color’ you are.

  11. Do not give up!!! Surely there is one of all the lawyers Trump has up there that can explain the law to these judges. The Daca program was illegal when the imbecile signed it to start with. Do not give up, get those moo Hera out of our country…

  12. Obama really didn’t have the authority to do this. Just went over everyone. I want to know how these judges have more say and power than the United States of America President Mr Trump. This is NOT RIGHT. OBAMA DIDNT DO IT LEGAL.

    1. Yes, but like a lot of other things Barry did, he was able to buffalo a lot of people who were scared to oppose him because of half his color and being called a “racist” by him and his ilk (Hillary, Sharpton, Jackson, Waters, Cummngs, – – – you get the point).

  13. DACA should remain in place if Democrats go along with Trump’s immigration plan.

  14. Actually DACA was a unconstitutional Executive order by president Obama. There is also the fact that it expired months ago. Trump should have the Supreme Court back him and that would be the end of it and don’t forget that court onlt has jurisdiction in the state they are in.

  15. No executive proclamation should be allowed to continue beyond the expiration of the President’s term of office during which time the Congress must concur. If it doesn’t it should not be allowed to be re-implement by a President in his second term (if there is one).

  16. When is the Administration going to stop trying to punish people for trying to make a better life in America, like TRUMP’S FATHER DID!!!

  17. How partisan and hypocritical. A democrat can circumvent, reinterpret, bend, and even break the law, but left-wing judges who know it’s wrong use partisan politics not to right it. Thank God for Trump’s conservative appointments, because it’s going to SCOTUS for sure. The dems have to be foaming at the mouth thinking a second term for Trump will practically guarantee a conservative replacement for Ginsberg. They can’t prop her up in her chair forever.

  18. This court has no jurisdiction in this matter. It is not a law. They can’t say it is illegal because it was never a law, just a “Program” that was created by Obama. The program has created a debt for the American Taxpayers who are paying for the benefits these illegal, “Non-Citizens” are receiving.

  19. First of DACA had a BUILT IN ENDING DATE as it was a TEMPORARY fix to give congress time to CONSTITUTIONALLY address the issue congress FAILED TO DO SO, all Trump did was REFUSE TO EXTEND IT when its BUILT IN EXPIRATION DATE arrived.

    He did not take any executive actions or do anything at all that caused it to expire he simply refused to violate the constitution as past presidents had done to keep it going.

    Therefore these courts are LEGISLATING from the bench to extend something that ENDED ITSELF on its own expiration date.

    All trump did Trump was REFUSE TO EXTEND THAT EXPIRATION DATE he did not force it to end through some order he issued therefore he did not “End Protections for ‘Dreamers’” he simply ALLOWED the built in expiration to happen.

    DACA was always supposed to end it was supposed to be a TEMPORARY fix while congress addressed the issue, but like so many TEMPORARY fixes done in the name of an EMERGENCY congress IGNORED their duty to address the situation expecting the TEMPORARY FIX to be extended perpetually without any congressional action.

    If these judges had done their CONSTITUTIONAL job they would have declared Obama’s EXECUTIVE action that was UNCONSTITUTIONAL in the beginning known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals would have been declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL and allowed to expire instead of exceeding their authority to EXTEND an executive action that expired upon its own as intended.

    “In November 2014, U.S. President Barack Obama announced changes to DACA which would expand it to include illegal immigrants who entered the country prior to 2010, eliminate the requirement that applicants be younger than 31 years old, and lengthen the renewable deferral period to two years.”

    Further with these changes Obama made it was no longer “DACA” as they no longer had to be CHILDREN to qualify. Thus he eliminated the entire EXCUSE used for the creation of this action. That being that they were brought here as young children and grew up without even learning the language or customs of their home nation. someone who came here in 2010 that is 31+ would in fact have learned these things.

  20. If the aren’t trying to become legal, send them back.

  21. We got a LOT of ILLEGAL GARBAGE from third world S – – – holes in OUR country. We not only need to get rid of what’s here and has infected and infested our country and culture, but do all possible to keep any additional garbage from entering OUR country,

  22. DACA was never legal; this goes on to the Supreme Court.

    1. Dreamers knew they were here illegally. Why should they get special treatment. They should be deported and go to the end of the line for legal immigration. In fact they should have to pay us tax payers back for their free education and any other public funds they received.

Comments are closed.