SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
dick durbin
'The Fight Continues' as Appeals Panel Rules Against DACA
"It is long past time for DACA recipients, and so many others, to have a pathway to citizenship," said one migrant rights advocate.
Jan 18, 2025
Migrant rights advocates vowed to keep fighting after a federal appeals court on Friday dealt a blow to a program providing work permits and deportation relief to hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children—shortly before the Monday inauguration of Republican President-elect Donald Trump, who campaigned on mass deportations.
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) has been ensnarled in legal battles since it was first introduced by the Obama-Biden administration in 2012. Friday's ruling from a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit stems from Republican-led states challenging the Biden-Harris administration's attempt to strengthen the program in 2022.
In 2023, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen from the Southern District of Texas found that the DACA rule from the previous year was unlawful and issued a nationwide injunction, though he left the program in place for current recipients. On Friday, the panel partly agreed but limited the injunction to Texas and blocked its decision from taking effect pending further appeal.
"We demand Congress find a way to urgently pass permanent protections for as many people as possible."
"The ruling restores DACA in 49 states, providing temporary relief for thousands of young people who study, work, and contribute to our nation. And all current DACA recipients remain protected, and able to renew their DACA grants, until this case concludes its journey through the courts," explained Nina Perales, vice president of litigation at MALDEF, which represents DACA recipients—often called Dreamers, due to related federal legislation that's never made it through Congress.
MALDEF president and general counsel Thomas A. Saenz said that "the panel's overreliance on the 5th Circuit's previous flawed analysis of standing and of the legality of DACA in its entirety make this decision itself ill-informed and nonconforming with respect to current federal law. Thus, we will be carefully considering, with our clients, the best options for preserving the work authorization (and forbearance) of all DACA recipients and DACA-eligible immigrants."
Saenz added that the panel's unanimous decision "presents squarely the question to be answered by Congress and the new administration: Will you finally accede to the expressed desires of bipartisan supermajorities of voters nationwide to preserve and protect the national asset that is made up of our DACA recipients and other DACA-eligible immigrants?"
Advocates for Dreamers, including some Democrats in Congress, also criticized the panel's ruling and called for legislative action.
National Immigration Law Center president Kica Matos
said Friday that the "ruling, just days before Donald Trump takes office, adds to the cruel uncertainty that immigrant youth have endured throughout years of politicized attacks on DACA."
"We also recognize that the incoming administration is likely to resume its assault on DACA and immigrant youth," Matos continued, referencing the Trump-Pence administration's effort to kill the program. "We will confront these attacks with the same force we used to defeat Trump's last attempt to end DACA. It's past time for politicians and courts to stop playing games with the lives of immigrant youth."
FWD.us president Todd Schulte said the new decision "is important and should be read in full," stressing that even the conservative court "made clear in its ruling the deep value of DACA by highlighting that ending the policy would do substantial harm to DACA recipients."
"A few weeks ago, President-elect Trump made welcome comments acknowledging that providing a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers is the best path forward for our country," he noted. "He now has a unique opportunity to protect DACA recipients and secure permanent protections for Dreamers."
"First, he should ensure that DACA stays in place by continuing to enact the policy as president and not supporting litigation against it," Schulte argued. "Second, he should also work with Republicans and Democrats to pass narrowly targeted legislation that specifically provides Dreamers the permanent protections that are best for them and all Americans."
"No one should have to live their life from court decision to court decision, nor in two-year increments. DACA has transformed the lives of so many. It is long past time for DACA recipients, and so many others, to have a pathway to citizenship," he added. As of October, there were over 537,000 active DACA recipients, according to federal data.
Greisa Martinez Rosas, executive director of United We Dream, said that the panel's decision "continues to baselessly attack immigrant young people, while also proving that our communities are essential to the economy and the future of the United States. This is why the 5th Circuit Court has kept renewals alive."
The advocate, who is undocumented, asserted that "the court's insistence on attacking DACA is especially concerning given" that 10 Senate Democrats on Friday joined Republicans in advancing the Laken Riley Act, "a bill that will put the lives of millions of people in danger of racial profiling as well as inhumane and indefinite detention."
"All the while, Trump is set to take office in just two days, pledging to carry out destructive mass raids and deportations quickly and forcefully," she pointed out. Late Friday,
The Wall Street Journalreported that the Trump-Vance administration is set to begin its promised deportations on Tuesday with an operation targeting residents of Chicago, Illinois.
"The pieces of Trump's destructive agenda have been laid out clearly," said Martinez Rosas. "Congress cannot continue to willfully ignore Trump's goal to target as many immigrants as possible and wreak complete havoc on families, cities, local economies, workplaces, and more nationwide. We demand Congress find a way to urgently pass permanent protections for as many people as possible, and for elected officials at every single level—from governors, mayors, and more—to seize every opportunity to reject Trump's agenda now and immediately shore up protections for immigrants nationwide."
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement about the Friday ruling that "the 5th Circuit is a renegade court. To say DACA is unconstitutional is not only cruel but way out of the mainstream of legal thinking."
"President-elect Donald Trump has said that he wants to do 'something about the Dreamers' and that he will work with Democrats on a plan, something I will take him up on while he is in office," he pledged.
Schumer wasn't alone. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said the "terrible" ruling "is another harsh reminder of the constant uncertainty DACA recipients face," while Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)—who has fought for Dreamers on Capitol Hill for over two decades—declared "the 5th Circuit DACA decision creates a force that will require a Washington response."
Even Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), who helped Republicans tee up the Laken Riley Act for a final vote next week, said that "I strongly disagree" with the ruling and called for a legislative fix.
In the House of Representatives—also narrowly controlled by Republicans—Democrats similarly urged action. Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), the daughter of Guatemalan immigrants whose district includes part of Chicago, said that the ruling "only adds to the uncertainty and fear of countless immigrant and mixed-status families."
"If you are eligible, renew your DACA—don't wait!" she said. "To our Dreamers—¡Esta lucha no termina aquí! The fight continues until each of our immigrant neighbors has the safety, stability, and dignity they deserve."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Durbin Demands Answers on Bondi's Foreign, Corporate Lobbying Clients
"I remain concerned about her ability to serve as an attorney general who will put her oath to the Constitution ahead of her fealty to Donald Trump," said the senator.
Jan 10, 2025
Ahead of a planned confirmation hearing for U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's attorney general nominee, Pam Bondi, the Senate Judiciary Committee's top Democrat on Friday joined government watchdogs in raising alarm over Bondi's past lobbying work.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the panel's ranking member, asked the Department of Justice (DOJ) to turn over information regarding Bondi's past registration as a foreign agent working on behalf of countries including Qatar, Kosovo, and Zimbabwe.
Bondi, the former attorney general of Florida, did not list foreign clients as potential conflicts of interest on her Senate Judiciary Questionnaire, said Durbin, who met with her earlier this week.
Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), the DOJ is "privy to a number of disclosures, including details on any written or oral contracts as well as money spent and received while lobbying," reportedThe Hill.
"To understand the extent to which her work as a FARA-registered lobbyist may create potential conflicts of interest should she be confirmed as attorney general, the committee requires additional information from the Department of Justice that is not otherwise available," Durbin wrote to the DOJ.
The senator also asked the National Archives and Records Administration to disclose to the committee records on more than 25 companies Bondi lobbied for, including Major League Baseball (MLB), Amazon, and General Motors (GM).
The DOJ in 2023 asked a federal court not to extend MLB's exemption from antitrust laws, and the department has reached settlements with Amazon and GM, along with other companies Bondi lobbied for.
"The role of the attorney general is to oversee an independent Justice Department that upholds the rule of law and is free of undue political influence," said Durbin on Wednesday. "Given Ms. Bondi’s responses to my questions, I remain concerned about her ability to serve as an attorney general who will put her oath to the Constitution ahead of her fealty to Donald Trump."
Durbin raised the concerns following the release of reports by Public Citizen and Accountable.US, on Bondi's history of lobbying work.
Accountable.US found that at least five of Bondi's major corporate lobbying clients "faced DOJ fines, investigations, or related scrutiny that could pose serious conflicts if she is confirmed as AG."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump 2.0 Looms, Durbin Urges DOJ to Rescind War Powers Opinions
Praising his targeting of "overbroad, undemocratic, and dangerous" opinions, one lawyer said that "irrespective of who holds the presidency, no one should have unilateral power to plunge the nation into major conflicts."
Jan 08, 2025
The top Democrat on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee this week urged the Department of Justice to rescind some war powers-related legal opinions and release certain records, a call that came in the lead-up to Republican President-elect Donald Trump's return to the White House.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) made the request in a Tuesday letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, stressing the Constitution's division of treaty-making and war powers between Congress and the president, as well as the president's obligation "to take care that the law be faithfully executed."
Highlighting that the DOJ "has previously withdrawn flawed or outdated" guidance, Durbin identified five opinions from the department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that he believes should be taken off the books:
- A 1989 opinion about the Federal Bureau of Investigation's authority to apprehend suspects overseas that concludes the president can unilaterally "override" the United Nations Charter's prohibition on the use of force;
- A 2001 opinion finding the president could effectively wage the entire "War on Terror" without congressional authorization;
- A 2002 opinion suggesting the president could wage the Iraq War without congressional authorization;
- A 2020 opinion related to the U.S. assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani that—though redacted—asserts the president has the authority to order an attack on a senior official from Iran; and
- A 2020 opinion claiming that a requirement for the president to give Congress advance notice of plans to withdraw from a treaty is unconstitutional.
"Congress and the executive branch may have differing views in some respects as to the separation of powers between them," Durbin wrote. "However, these opinions are concerning outliers even by the standards of the executive branch's own legal doctrine. Indeed, it does not appear that OLC has relied upon these opinions in other publicly available legal memoranda. For these reasons, I urge the Department of Justice to withdraw them."
The senator also gave Garland a list of 20 records to release "relating to the president's authority to deploy U.S. armed forces within the United States, and the activities in which those military personnel may or may not engage."
"The need for transparency regarding these legal interpretations is particularly urgent today given the risk of domestic military deployment to suppress protests or carry out mass deportations," he wrote to the outgoing attorney general.
Sharing the letter on social media Wednesday, Durbin more clearly said, "Donald Trump has promised to deploy the military for mass deportations, and we have a right to know how the Justice Department interprets this authority."
Durbin sent the letter on the same day that Trump, during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago, refused to rule out using military force to take over the Panama Canal and Danish territory Greenland, sparking global condemnation.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular