Dreamers win for now in Texas, but their fight is far from over

Bloomberg

Nearly 700,000 undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children won another ruling preserving their protection from deportation, though the Texas judge who sided with them cast serious doubt on the legality of the so-called Dreamer programme.
US District Judge Andrew Hanen in the border town of Brownsville ruled that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton waited too long to challenge a program that’s been in place for six years and allows the young immigrants to live, work and study legally in America. But the judge gave Texas and its allies in nine other Republican-led states a chance to appeal and try again to block the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals programme, known as DACA, even as President Donald Trump and Congress remain in a stalemate over whether to preserve, modify or phase it out.
In a 117-page order, Hanen agreed with Texas and the Trump administration that the DACA programme for immigrant youngsters is almost identical to the Obama-era programme aimed at protecting undocumented parents of American citizens that Hanen struck down previously. But the judge said he could find no legal justification to grant an emergency halt to DACA when the programme has been functioning since 2012.
Judges in New York, California and Washington have halted the Trump administration’s efforts to terminate DACA in rulings that the Justice Department is now appealing. In the Texas case, Dreamers were in no real danger of immediate deportation because the red states asked only that the government be prevented from issuing any new work permits or DACA renewals.
Unlike the other judges, Hanen found that the Dreamer program probably violates federal law, namely the Administrative Procedures Act, in how it was enacted and said Texas and its allies would be harmed if it remains in place.

‘Popular Programme’
Because DACA was never intended to be permanent, its legitimacy needs to be resolved, the judge wrote, while acknowledging it’s a “popular programme and one that Congress should consider saving.”
DACA is of “major to a large segment of this country, and all parties are in need of and desire a definitive answer as soon as they can get one,” Hanen wrote, in allowing an appeal to be pursued. “A definitive appellate ruling one way or the other on this purely legal question could lead to the immediate conclusion of this case.”
Paxton said he’s encouraged by August 31’s ruling that the programme ultimately will be struck down. “We’re now very confident that DACA will soon meet the same fate as the Obama-era Deferred Action for Parents of Americans programme,” Paxton said. “President Obama used DACA to rewrite federal law without congressional approval. Our lawsuit is vital to restoring the rule of law to our nation’s immigration system.” The Justice Department agreed in its own statement.
“As the Justice Department has consistently argued, DACA is an unlawful attempt to circumvent Congress, and we are pleased the court agreed today,” spokesman Devin O’Malley said.