Versus regions of the university of california and related cases. General francisco, general francisco. In 2017, the fifth circuit held that dhaka and expansion were likely unlawful. Face of those decisions, the department of Homeland Security determined that it no longer wish to retain the policy based on its belief that the policy was illegal, has doubt about its illegality, and its general opposition to broad, nonenforcement policies. That decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, it is not subject to judicial review. Previousion ended a nonenforcement policy by which the department agreed to not enforce the ima against hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens. The decision whether or not to enforce the law is committed to the unreviewable discretion, unless the statute restricts it. Nothing in the ina requires the department, a Law Enforcement agency, do not enforce the law. Decision to and this nonenforcement policy was reasonable. Dr. Was a temporary measure that on
Verses regents of the university of california and the related cases. General francisco . Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court, in 2017 the fifth circuit held the dapa and the expansion of daca were unlawful, a judge in this court affirmed and in the decisions the department of Homeland Security reasonably determined that it no longer wished to retain the daca policy based on its belief that the policy was illegal, its serious doubts about its illegality and its general opposition to broad, nonenforcement policies. That decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, its not subject to judicial review. The rescission simply ended a previous nonenforcement policy whereby the department agreed to not enforce the ina against hundreds of thousands of illegal ail epps, but the decision whether or not to enforce the law is committed to the agencys unreviewable discretion unless a statute restricts it, and nothing in the ina requires the department, a Law Enforcement agency
Policies. That decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, it is not subject to judicial review. The decision ended a nonenforcement policy whereby the department agreed to not enforce it against hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens. But the decision whether or not to enforce the law is committed to the agencys discretion unless it restricts it and nothing requires the department , a Law Enforcement agency, to not enforce the law. Second, this was reasonable. Daca was a measure that could be rescinded at any time, and the departments reasonable concern about its legality and its general opposition to broad nonenforcement policies provided more than a reasonable basis for ending it. After all, an agency is not required to push its legally dubious power to not enforce the law to its logical extreme. Undermines competency in the rule of law itself and conflicts with the agencies Law Enforcement mission. I would like to begin with the review ability question. If the attorne
Greta the 51st attorney general of texas joins us today, republican ken paxton. Thank you, sir, for being here. Atty. Gen. Paxton thank you for having me on. Greta i appreciate it. We also have with us kevin diaz, who is with the houston chronicle, the washington correspondent for them, and josh gerstein, who is senior White House Reporter for politico. Josh, you have the first question, go ahead. Josh welcome, mr. Attorney general. I wanted to start by asking you i think one of the programs or controversies you have been associated with most recently, which is the daca program for dreamers, litigation threatened by your Office Appears to have spurred the Trump Administration into winding that program down. At a hearing just a few weeks ago in new york, a federal judge seemed very perturbed by the way the wind down was carried out. He called it, unacceptable to me as a human being and as an american, and he also called the winding down of that program heartless. How do you react when y
The wind down was carried out. He called it, unacceptable to me as a human being and as an american, and he also called the winding down of that program heartless. How do you react when you hear those kinds of comments about a policy change that many people view that you set in motion . Atty. Gen. Paxton daca is very similar to dapa. We had a lawsuit filed by our previous attorney general, who is now governor, governor abbott. As i was walking into office, we took that case from the District Court to the fifth circuit, and we won at both places. Then ultimately took it to the u. S. Supreme court and got an injunction to stop it. Ultimately, that was rescinded. It was rescinded largely because it was unconstitutional. Daca was no different. Whether you like these policies or not, ultimately it is up to congress to make these decisions, not the white house , not some agency. This was founded on constitutional principle. Whether you like policies or hate policies, ultimately, it is up to