Friday, September 21

Attorneys representing UC claim DACA rescission did not follow protocol


Lawyers from Covington & Burling LLP representing the University of California spoke about the UC's lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s administration for rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. (Jenna Nicole Smith/Daily Bruin)

Lawyers from Covington & Burling LLP representing the University of California spoke about the UC's lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s administration for rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. (Jenna Nicole Smith/Daily Bruin)


Lawyers representing the University of California said on a conference call Friday the government did not act in accordance with proper legislative procedure when it rescinded a program that deferred deportation for undocumented individuals brought to the United States as children.

The University, represented by Covington & Burling LLP attorneys, has been engaged in a lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s administration for rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program since September.

The UC filed the lawsuit against the Trump administration in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California three days after it announced an end to DACA on Sept. 5.

Jeffrey Davidson, a partner at Covington & Burling LLP, will present oral arguments in court in Pasadena, California, next week. The University is using the case to take a public stand on behalf of DACA recipients nationwide, Davidson said.

“This case is fundamentally about whether these young people are allowed to continue to work and be recognized as the young Americans that they are,” Davidson said.

Davidson added the University’s main arguments are based on how the Trump administration did not follow the correct protocol for rescinding funding for DACA. Normally the president must propose the rescission of funding for major programs to Congress, but if both chambers do not approve this decision within 45 days, funding for programs such as DACA must be made available again.

“The government cannot act precipitously or arbitrarily, which is exactly what this government did (in rescinding DACA),” Davidson said.

Three of the four higher court judges who have reviewed the lawsuits against the Trump administration’s decision to rescind DACA found it the rescission unlawful.

Alexander Berengaut, another attorney representing the UC in court, said that because the judges who ruled against the Trump administration were appointed by both Republicans and Democratic presidents, their decisions have more to do with the legality of rescinding DACA than their political affiliation.

“(The UC’s appeal is) not about politics, but based on the law about how government decisions should be made,” Berengaut said. “One of our central arguments is that the government didn’t follow the rules about how those laws are made.”

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Share on Reddit
City and Crime editor

Coneeny is the 2018-2019 assistant News editor for the City and Crime beat. She was previously a contributor for the National News and Higher Education beat. She is a second-year pre-global studies student from the east coast.


Comments are supposed to create a forum for thoughtful, respectful community discussion. Please be nice. View our full comments policy here.

  • Mira dean

    All that money spent on Attorneys for illegal aliens? and where is it coming from? When will politicians and
    people in general figure out that when you reward illegal immigration
    with jobs, drivers licenses, discounts in college tuition, scholarships
    encourages illegal entry. DACA recipients care about one thing,
    themselves. They have used billions of taxpayer dollars and want more
    and more.

    There is an estimated 800,000 DACA
    recipients in the US. That is 800,000 jobs American Citizens don’t have
    or will be in competition for. So when you hear “we pay taxes…we pay
    taxes” about “contributions” by illegal aliens taking American jobs,
    remember that also is at a cost in jobs citizens should have.

    Just
    some of the costs associated with illegal immigration, we will pass
    this burden on to our children as has been passed on to us.

    *The
    cost of educating illegal aliens children is staggering. From K-12 it
    costs taxpayers $122,000 for EACH illegal alien student. This does not
    include the billions spent on bilingual education for illegal aliens.

    *Currently
    city, and state officials are appropriating millions of taxpayer
    dollars for legal fees to to file law suits and in defense of illegal
    aliens being deported.

    *2012 illegal aliens sent
    home $62 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. This
    is why Mexico is getting involved in our politics.

    *30%
    percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.Does not
    include local jails and State Prisons. At $21,000 per year expense per
    inmate in Federal Prison U do the math.

    *$3Million
    Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens, I repeat 3 MILLION
    a DAY to process Illegals in the Criminal justice system.

    *$2.2Billion
    dollars a year is spent on is spent on food assistance programs such as
    SNAP (food stamps) WIC, & free school lunches.All can be found on
    google.

    The CBO (congressional budget off ice)
    estimates it will cost American taxpayers 26 billion over the next
    10years if 1.8 million re legalized.

  • Peter

    “This case is fundamentally about whether these young people are allowed to continue to work and be recognized as the young Americans that they are,” Davidson said.

    Young Americans???? You better care for the “real” young Americans that struggle with opioids, poverty, loans and abuse instead of taking care of the criminal Latino offspring. “Like father, like son” – the children are probably not better than the illiterate parents that have abused the public welfare for decades.