U.S. Supreme Court won't take up Dreamers case, dealing Trump a setback

The U.S. Supreme Court dealt a setback to President Donald Trump on Monday, requiring hisadministration to maintain protections he has sought to end forhundreds of thousands of immigrants brought illegally into theUnited States as children.

The justices refused to hear the administration's appeal ofa federal judge's Jan. 9 injunction that halted Trump's move torescind a program that benefits immigrants known as Dreamersimplemented in 2012 by his Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama.

Under the Republican president's action, the protections weredue to start phasing out beginning in March.

In a brief order, the justices did not explain theirreasoning, but said the appeal was "denied without prejudice," indicating they will maintain an open mind on the underlyinglegal issue still being considered by a lower court, the SanFrancisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The highcourt also said it expects the lower court to "proceedexpeditiously to decide this case."

Trump said Monday, "We'll see what happens from there."

"You know, we tried to get it moved quickly, because we'd like to helpDACA. I think everybody in this room wants to help withDACA," he said, referring to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. "But the Supreme Court just ruled that it has to go through the normal channels."

He didn't seem to hold out much hope of winning at the 9th Circuit, criticizing the liberal-leaning court by saying "nothing's as bad as the 9th Circuit."

"I mean, it's really sad when every single case filed against us is in the9thCircuit. We lose, we lose, we lose and then we do fine in the Supreme Court."

Under the DACA program, roughly 700,000 young adult, mostly Hispanics, are protected from deportation and given work permits for two-yearperiods, after which they must reapply.

The Trump administration had challenged a nationwideinjunction by San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge William Alsup, who ruled last month that DACA must remain in place whilethe litigation is resolved.

'Unusual and unnecessary'

In an unusual move, the administration appealed directly tothe Supreme Court instead of going first to a federal appealscourt.

Alsup ruled that the challengers, including the states ofCalifornia, Maine, Maryland and Minnesota and Obama's former homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano, were likely tosucceed in arguing that the administration's decision to endDACA was arbitrary.

Justice Department spokespersonDevin O'Malley said in astatement that the administration will continue to defend theDepartment of Homeland Security's "lawful authority to wind downDACA in an orderly manner."

O'Malley said that "while we were hopeful for a differentoutcome," the high court rarely agrees to take up cases before alower court has ruled, "though in our view it was warranted for the extraordinary injunction requiring the Department of Homeland Security to maintain DACA."

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, a Democrat,called the administration's bid to bypass the 9th Circuit"unusual andunnecessary."

"We look forward to explaining to the Ninth Circuit courtthat DACA is fully legal. For the sake of the Dreamers who help make our economy and our state strong, the rescission of DACAshould not be allowed to stand," Becerra said in a statement.

Other arguments before courts

The DACA dispute is the latest major case brought to theSupreme Court for its consideration arising from Trump's immigration policies. The justices are due to hear arguments inApril on the legality of his latest travel ban order barring entry to people from several Muslim-majority nations.

Congress so far has failed to pass legislation to addressthe fate of the Dreamers,including a potential path to citizenship.

Trump's move to rescind DACA prompted legal challenges byDemocratic state attorneys general and variousorganizations andindividuals in multiple federal courts. His administrationargued that Obama exceeded his powers under the constitutionwhen he bypassed Congress and created DACA.

On Feb. 13, a second U.S. judge issued a similar injunctionordering the Trump administration to keep DACA in place. U.S.District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in Brooklyn acted in a lawsuitbrought by plaintiffs including a group of states led by NewYork.

Judges Alsup and Garaufis did not say that the administration could not at some point end the program, only that there was evidence it did not follow the correct proceduresin doing so.

The rulings allow those who had previously applied for protections and whose two-year status was soon to expire to apply beyond the deadline set by the administration in September.

The original plan put on hold by the court rulings said that only those who reapplied by October and whose status was due toexpire by March 5 could reapply.

The administration is not processing new applications.