(Scroll down for commentary.)
From NBC News:
The Department of Homeland Security announced Saturday it would resume processing renewal applications for young undocumented immigrants seeking protection from deportation under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA.
The Trump administration announced in September that it would eliminate DACA, which protects people who were illegally brought to the United States as children — so-called Dreamers — from being deported. The administration said at the time it did not have the authority to administer the program and it was up to Congress to make it law.
But on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco ruled that the Trump administration’s decision to eliminate DACA was based on a shoddy legal argument and called the move “arbitrary” and “capricious.”
Ruling in favor of the University of California, Alsup ordered the government to resume DACA renewal applications while challenges to the September order work their way through the courts.
The White House and President Donald Trump initially blasted the decision. But in a statement Saturday, DHS said: “Until further notice, and unless otherwise provided in this guidance, the DACA policy will be operated on the terms in place before it was rescinded on Sept. 5, 2017.”
The judge’s ruling is an outrageous abuse of judicial authority and is flatly unconstitutional. This rogue district court judge has usurped the President’s Article II authority in a gross violation of Separation of Powers. If our’s was a healthy republic, two things would happen. First, the President would ignore this ruling, as it is lawless on its face. This is not simply a disagreement over interpretation of law or of the Constitution, this is a judge far-exceeding the legal bounds of his authority and illegally directing another branch of government to obey his personal political commands. To this point, it should be remembered, that the Constitution does not enumerate any power of the courts to direct another branch of government to do anything. This was a power that the court claimed for itself in 1803 in the case of Marbury v. Madison. While I am not challenging the court’s implicit authority of judicial review as it was first explained in that case, it is clear that this judge’s order reinstating DACA goes far beyond any reasonable extension of the holding of Marbury. Therefore, it should rightly be ignored. The second thing that would happen if our’s was a healthy republic, is that Congress would immediately begin impeachment proceedings to remove this judge from the bench. But alas, our’s is not a healthy republic. It is a republic being crushed by the weight of judicial tyranny. This is just the latest example.