Donate to IRLI
Crane v. Napolitano--Why has the Obama Administration not Rescinded the Unconstitutional DACA Program?
In August of 2012, ten ICE agents sued DHS officials over the implementation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) and aspects of the June 17, 2011 Morton memo (“Memo”) regarding prosecutorial discretion. Specifically, the ICE agents argued that DACA and the Memo are unconstitutional because Congress, by federal statute, requires the agents to place aliens who are not “clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted” to the United States into removal proceedings. 8 U.S.C. § 1225. However, DACA and the Memo prohibit the agents from complying with this statute for aliens who meet the DACA criteria.
On June 28, 2013, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an important decision in the cases of Keller v. City of Fremont and Martinez v. City of Fremont, validating the authority of cities to deter an influx of illegal immigrants. The case involved a challenge by plaintiffs represented by the ACLU and MALDEF to a Fremont ordinance, passed by popular initiative, which prohibited the employment and the harboring of illegal immigrants in the City. The employment provision was previously upheld and not appealed.
On December 13, 2012, attorneys Kris Kobach and Garrett Roe attended oral arguments in the cases of Martinez v. City of Fremont and Keller v. City of Fremont before a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Kris Kobach argued for the City of Fremont.
Representing the landlord and tenant plaintiffs were attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. Also arguing against the City was an attorney for the United States Department of Justice.
On November 15, 2012, IRLI filed an Amicus Brief supporting Arizona's right to enforce the federal harboring laws in the case of Valle del Sol v. Whiting. This case, originally entitled Friendly House v. Whiting, is the ACLU's challenge to Arizona's SB 1070. This appeal concerns only Section 5 of SB 1070 which replicates, in Arizona law, the federal harboring provisions.