Wait, Maine's Nazi-Tattooed Dem Senate Candidate Hosted a Passover Seder?
Two US Planes Were Shot Down in Iran Yesterday, One Pilot Is Still...
We Know Why Justice Samuel Alito Went to the Hospital Last Month
The Moon Belongs to Those Who Reach It
Democrats' Open Borders Policies Caused a Massive Spike in Chicago's HIV Cases
A Thief’s Final Surrender
It’s Time for a 'King of Kings' March!
Sec. Rubio: The Family of Iran's Famous General Were 'Living Lavishly' in U.S....
Pro-Russian Parties Lead in Bulgaria, Raising Stakes for Ukraine and the EU
AI Water Use? That’s a Hoax.
The Image of Keith Ellison
Petition for Government Spending Caps So Our Grandchildren Can Prosper
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is? Union Leaders Still Making Political Donations...
With Omeed Assefi in Charge, America First Antitrust Is Alive and Well
The Day Nothing Happened — and Everything Changed
Tipsheet

'Unlawful from its Inception': Justice Thomas Rips DACA Decision

'Unlawful from its Inception': Justice Thomas Rips DACA Decision
AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

In 2017, President Trump cancelled his predecessor's order to allow illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. before age 16 to apply for protection from deportation. On Thursday, SCOTUS ruled that Trump's move was was "arbitrary and capricious" and that the DACA program would be upheld. Chief Justice Roberts, always a swing vote, swung in the direction of the court's four liberal justices. In their ruling, the justices note that they did not rule on the merits of the case, but on the procedure the Trump administration used to try and rescind DACA.

Advertisement

In the primary dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas reasoned why his colleagues were way off base. In the first place, he notes, Obama's DACA program was unconstitutional.

"DHS created DACA during the Obama administration without any statutory authorization and without going  through the requisite rulemaking process," Thomas argues. "As a result, the program was unlawful from its inception."

Yet, "under the auspices of today’s decision, administrations can bind their successors by unlawfully adopting significant legal changes through Executive Branch agency memoranda."

"Today’s decision must be recognized for what it is: an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision," he later adds.

Advertisement

At issue here is whether emotion has replaced the law. Liberal lawmakers argue it's inhumane to send DREAMers away, especially since for some of them the U.S. is the only home they've ever known and they were brought here through no fault of their own. But for conservatives, it's a matter of maintaining law and order. And Justice Thomas forcefully communicated the latter sentiment.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement