Supreme Court will meet behind closed doors Friday on DACA

[DonViejo]

Source: CNN




By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter

Updated 6:04 AM ET, Fri February 16, 2018

(CNN)The Supreme Court will meet behind closed doors Friday to decide whether to take up a lower court opinion that temporarily blocked President Donald Trump's effort to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals immigration program.

The Justice Department is taking the rare step of asking the Supreme Court to review the opinion -- issued by a San Francisco-based judge -- even before a federal appeals court has had a chance to weigh in.

Under normal circumstances, the Supreme Court disfavors parties from bypassing lower court proceedings and asking for direct review.

"The court hasn't granted cert before judgment since 2004, and it hasn't done so without a circuit-level ruling on the question presented since 1988, " said professor Stephen Vladeck of the University of Texas School of Law, a CNN contributor.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/16/politics/supreme-court-daca-immigration/index.html?sr=twCNNp021618supreme-court-daca-immigration0734AMStory&CNNPolitics=Tw

[getagrip_already]

1. and so democracy dies.....

the scotus wouldn't be taking this up unless a majority of them oppose the lower court ruling. They see it as time critical to address it early, with imminent harm to the government.

DACA is dead. You get what you elect or fail to block by voting third party..

[Fred Sanders]

3. Changing Dreamers law or EO is not an imminent issue. The March "deadline" is

an artificial construct. Lots of hoops to jump over.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/reportersguide.pdf

[getagrip_already]

5. it's the stay they are addressing....

If allowed to remain in place, the program wouldn't end in march. It would continue indefinitely until the case was resolved. It could take 6 months before it would organically get to the court.

What is happening in 6 months I wonder?

They want this stay off the books now. It doesn't impact either hte march deadline or any pending legislation in and of itself, but it does continue the program.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. The Supreme Court always meets "behind closed doors"

when they aren't hearing oral arguments. While granting certiorari before judgment is unusual, meeting "behind closed doors" is the way they decide everything. The headline makes it look like they are up to something unusual.

[elleng]

8. Right. However, this would be unusual:

'The Justice Department is taking the rare step of asking the Supreme Court to review the opinion -- issued by a San Francisco-based judge -- even before a federal appeals court has had a chance to weigh in.'

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. Unusual, but there is a procedure for doing this.

The request is not granted very often, and is usually limited to situations where time is of the essence. I think it's what happened when they agreed to hear the Nixon tapes case.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

4. Friday round-up, SCOTUSblog

Edith Roberts Editor

[email protected]

Posted Fri, February 16th, 2018 5:30 am

Friday round-up

....
At Reuters’ On the Case blog, Alison Frankel explains why the Trump administration’s request to hear a challenge to a district-court order blocking the administration’s attempt to unwind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program before the court of appeals has ruled on the issue may be more of a long shot after the issuance this week of “a second nationwide injunction barring rescission of the DACA program.”
....

Recommended Citation: Edith Roberts, Friday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Feb. 16, 2018, 5:30 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/02/friday-round-up-407/

[yallerdawg]

6. I bet they are going to order a stop to deporting "Dreamers"...

and order the legislative branch to pass a law that will codify DACA as Federal law. Nothing else will pass constitutional judicial review by this co-equal branch of the government.

Deporting de facto Americans to countries they have never known is unconscionable. Alito and Thomas might even sign off on this!

Of course, I'm an optimist.

I actually thought the New England Patriots defense was going to play in the Super Bowl. I sure can get it wrong.

[mainer]

7. Hoping this is good news. They must see the urgency.

Maybe this is why they're moving quickly.