Georgetown Law & UBN Life on Hold

The first three cases were appealed up to the Supreme Court, which consolidated the cases under The Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California . 97 The Court issued an opinion in June 2020, finding that the proposed rescission did not follow proper procedure as it was arbitrary and capricious, and could not continue given the way it had been rescinded. 98 Although this left the door open for the Trump Administration to alter their approach to rescission, the transition from the Trump Administration to the Biden Administration has made this issue moot, as the Biden Administration has committed to continuing DACA. 99 The Supreme Court declined to hear the case Casa de Maryland v. Department of Homeland Security , 100 but the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals also found that the rescission of DACA in that case was arbitrary and capricious. 101 Challenges to DACA Texas v. United States 102 is a federal case filed in 2018 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas that challenges the legality of the DACA program as a whole on behalf of nine states: Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Carolina, and West Virginia. 103 In August of 2020, the Court, under presiding judge Andrew S. Hanen, allowed for both sides to take time to draft and submit new briefs incorporating the outcome of The Department of Homeland Security. v. Regents of the University of California, as discussed above. The case is still in pre-trial, and both sides have asked for summary judgment in their favor, hoping to win on the merits of their cases and avoid trial altogether. 104 A status conference was held at the end of March 2021, given that the landscape has changed under the transition to the Biden Administration. 105 Judge Hanen could rule at any time, or the case could move forward into trial. 106 TPS Litigation The Trump Administration’s efforts to wind down TPS designations for a series of countries caused a flurry of litigation. What follows is a snapshot of the statuses of those various lawsuits as of the time of this writing. Given the transition to the Biden Administration, it remains to be seen how or if the government will continue to defend the prior administration’s actions in these cases. Ramos, et al v. Nielsen, et al. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined DHS from implementing and enforcing the decision to terminate TPS for Sudan, Haiti, El Salvador, and Nicaragua. District Judge Edward Chen rejected the government’s motion to dismiss the case, holding that: “Plaintiffs have plausibly 97 Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., 140 S. Ct. 1891 (2020). 98 Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., SupremeCourt.gov (June 18, 2020), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/19pdf/18-587_5ifl.pdf 99 Preserving and Fortifying Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), WhiteHouse.gov (Jan. 20, 2021), https://www.whitehouse. gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/preserving-and-fortifying-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-daca/. 100 Department of Homeland Security v. CASA de Maryland, ScotusBlog.com, https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/department- of-homeland-security-v-casa-de-maryland/ (last visited May 4, 2021). 101 CASA de Md., Inc. v. Trump, 971 F.3d 220 (4th Cir. 2020). 102 Texas v. United States, No. 1:18-CV-68, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 207498 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 21, 2020). 103 Texas v. United States, MALDEF (Mar. 29, 2021), https://www.maldef.org/2021/03/texas-v-united-states/.

104 Id. 105 Id. 106 Id.

Life On Hold: Black Immigrants & the Promise of Liberian Refugee Immigration Fairness

24