Our Website Uses Cookies 

We and the third parties that provide content, functionality, or business services on our website may use cookies to collect information about your browsing activities in order to provide you with more relevant content and promotional materials, on and off the website, and help us understand your interests and improve the website.

For more information, please contact us or consult our Privacy Notice.

Your binder contains too many pages, the maximum is 40.

We are unable to add this page to your binder, please try again later.

This page has been added to your binder.

DACA Program’s Fate Considered by Appeals Court

May 17, 2018, Society for Human Resource Management

Jeffrey Davidson is quoted by the Society for Human Resource Management in an article regarding oral arguments before the Ninth Circuit in a case challenging the federal government's attempted rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Davidson, who represents the University of California in this case, argued that the government's decision to rescind DACA was based on an incorrect conclusion of law, and therefore, the district court's injunction that allowed the DACA program to continue was correctly issued. "It is the quintessential role of the courts to review those conclusions of law and make sure that agencies are abiding by the law," said Davidson. The Administrative Procedure Act requires certain agency actions to be reasonably explained. When the government reverses a prior policy, it needs to consider the interest of the people affected by the change, Davidson said. The government didn't say anything about the welfare of DACA recipients, their families, or their employers, he added.

Share this article: