Trump administration's 'sloppy' work has led to Supreme Court losses

[webfact]

Trump administration's 'sloppy' work has led to Supreme Court losses

By Lawrence Hurley

 

U.S. President Donald Trump uses a mobile phone during a roundtable discussion on the reopening of small businesses in the State Dining Room at the White House in Washington, U.S., June 18, 2020. REUTERS/Leah Millis

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling stopping President Donald Trump from rescinding protections for "Dreamers" immigrants marked the second time in a year that he lost a major case because Chief Justice John Roberts faulted his administration for sloppiness in the policymaking process.

 

The conservative Roberts, joined by the court's four liberal justices, decided on Thursday that the administration's actions in crafting the immigration policy were "arbitrary and capricious" under a federal law called the Administrative Procedure Act.

 

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program protects roughly 649,000 immigrants, mostly young Hispanic adults born in Mexico and other Latin American countries, from deportation and provides them work permits.

 

Thursday's decision echoed a June 2019 ruling in which the court - Roberts again siding with the four liberal justices - faulted the administration's plan to add a citizenship to the 2020 U.S. census.

 

Roberts wrote then that the administration had violated the same law, concluding that the stated rationale for adding the question "seems to have been contrived." Critics said the question was intended to dissuade immigrants from taking part in the decennial population count.

 

In both 5-4 rulings, Roberts split from his four fellow conservatives and ruled against the administration on technical legal process issues without judging whether the actual policy was lawful.

 

The rulings showed that Roberts, an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush, is willing to push back against Trump. They also showed that in key instances Trump's administration has been unable to craft high-profile policies that will stand up in court.

 

"Quite honestly, this is why we have had so many victories against this administration in court. They just refuse to follow the rules," Xavier Becerra, California's Democratic attorney general, told reporters. "They seem to be very impatient and they don't believe the rules apply to them."

 

Becerra, among those challenging the DACA rescission, pointed to another ruling issued on Wednesday by a different court. A California-based judge blocked Trump's Department of Education from withholding federal coronavirus pandemic relief funds from students who do not qualify for financial aid.

 

Case Western Reserve University School of Law professor Jonathan Adler said that in some cases that Trump's administration has lost, courts have adopted an "unduly rigorous standard" that makes it harder for the government to win. But, Adler added, "it's also fair to say this administration has had its fair share of sloppy work."

 

Trump's administration has lost 79 out of 85 cases involving federal agencies on deregulatory or policy issues tracked by the Institute for Policy Integrity, a think tank connected to New York University School of Law.

 

Earthjustice, an environmental group that regularly sues the administration over regulatory issues, has said it has won 33 of 40 cases decided on the merits of the legal issues involved. In one of them, a judge blocked Trump's attempt to open vast areas of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans to oil and gas leasing.

 

The Justice Department did not respond to a request seeking comment.

 

TRUMP VERSUS JUDGES

"Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn't like me?" Trump asked on Twitter on Thursday.

 

Trump has often criticized American courts and judges - and Roberts himself - for ruling against his policies. Roberts in November 2018 hit back at Trump after the president called a judge who ruled against one of the president's immigration policies an "Obama judge."

 

But Trump has also won a number of big cases, with victories over ending subsidy payments to health insurance companies, various deregulatory efforts and his the efforts toward a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border.

 

The Supreme Court has bailed him out in two major cases.

 

Lower courts found that his administration did not adequately explain why it was in the interests of the United States to implement Trump's 2017 travel ban targeting people from several Muslim-majority countries, as required by federal immigration law. Lower courts also faulted the administration for failing to back up its policies to restrict transgender troops from the military.

 

The Supreme Court, in both instances, sided with the administration to allow the travel ban and the transgender military policy to take effect.

 

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Additional reporting by Andrew Chung, Jan Wolfe and Valerie Volcovici; Editing by Will Dunham)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-06-19

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[pegman]

Trump famously told his supporters they would get tired of winning so much. Just another time he got it so wrong.

[Chomper Higgot]

Add the SC’s ruling on the civil rights protections extended to LGBTQ persons.

 

A fabulous and important win.

[mtls2005]

The DACA decision, while welcome and a good step, is only a temporary relief. trump could simply order ag barr to issue a "more legal" order. That might take years again, and public opinion seems squarely in support of DACA, so who knows what he might do? Maybe ag barr could suspend Habeus Corpus for DACA recipients, and then build concentration camps for them? stephen miller's wet dream?

[TopDeadSenter]

Its's concerning that Justice Roberts seems to have gone rogue recently. It couldn’t have anything to do with him having appointed those FISA judges, could it? I'll bet being responsible for appointing the judges on a secret court who helped the FBI spy illegally on the Trump campaign in the biggest US political scandal ever will be causing him some major stress. The chickens are coming home to roost and stress can do funny things to people.

[Somtamnication]

Good old Roberts. Twice in a week now. A glass to you, sir!

[stevenl]

12 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Its's concerning that Justice Roberts seems to have gone rogue recently. It couldn’t have anything to do with him having appointed those FISA judges, could it? I'll bet being responsible for appointing the judges on a secret court who helped the FBI spy illegally on the Trump campaign in the biggest US political scandal ever will be causing him some major stress. The chickens are coming home to roost and stress can do funny things to people.

So requiring proper legislation is going rogue? It looks to me the conservative judges who seem to be accepting sloppiness without questions are the rogue ones. 

Edited June 19, 2020 by stevenl

[TopDeadSenter]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

So requiring proper legislation is going rogue? It looks to me the conservative judges who seem to be accepting sloppiness without questions are the rogue ones. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Obama use an executive order to create the DACA laws? So Obama can do that, but Trump can't undo it using the same mechanism? Sorry, it's a tough sell, unless the GOP and Dems are subject to a different rule book?

[mtls2005]

9 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

but Trump can't undo it using the same mechanism?

 

Believe he can, it just can't be sloppy or illegal.

 

Better to task ag barr with the work, rather than DHS Secretary Nielsen, or her current acting replacement?

 

 

[RJRS1301]

31 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Its's concerning that Justice Roberts seems to have gone rogue recently. It couldn’t have anything to do with him having appointed those FISA judges, could it? I'll bet being responsible for appointing the judges on a secret court who helped the FBI spy illegally on the Trump campaign in the biggest US political scandal ever will be causing him some major stress. The chickens are coming home to roost and stress can do funny things to people.

Gone rogue? Perhaps the separation of judiciary and state has something do with carrying out his duties for independence  under the law, instead of being a rubber stamp for the administration.

Judges are meant to remain impartial and administer the law, not favour any incumbent who has capricious reasons for wanting a decision to be made.

 

 

[RJRS1301]

19 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Obama use an executive order to create the DACA laws? So Obama can do that, but Trump can't undo it using the same mechanism? Sorry, it's a tough sell, unless the GOP and Dems are subject to a different rule book?

Obviously the Obama law was not sloppy or capricious, and did not require the intervention of the SC, 

[Emdog]

The slop flows from the top

[stevenl]

30 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Obama use an executive order to create the DACA laws? So Obama can do that, but Trump can't undo it using the same mechanism? Sorry, it's a tough sell, unless the GOP and Dems are subject to a different rule book?

Yes, he did. That EO was well prepared and thought through and all legal. Trump's EO on this was not well prepared and not thought through and not legal.

 

Nothing to do with the mechanism, although yes, proper laws going through Congress and Senate would be preferred, but with the execution.

[Tug]

Perhaps it was the sloppy arbitrary way it was presented I’m hoping there was some compassion and morals involved as well anyway wonderful I’m delighted 

[BobBKK]

To be fair if they have not followed the rules closely they deserve to lose. I don't think this decision is about right or wrong just process.

[Srikcir]

'The Supreme Court sided with the administration to allow the travel ban.'

To be fair the administration amended its ban twice since the original lower court decision against the administration and added a non-Muslim (African?) country to the ban by the time the case finally went to the SCOTUS.

The SCOTUS ruling was based appropiately on the latest revised version of the ban. Again, it was the administration's rush to invoke the original Muslim exclusive ban that made the ban a legal "poison pill."

[Bundooman]

TRUMP VERSUS JUDGES

"Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn't like me?" Trump asked on Twitter on Thursday.

 

No less so than most of the world's population, excluding hill-billy highly educated republicans such as himself, of course.

[Eric Loh]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

Quite honestly, this is why we have had so many victories against this administration in court. They just refuse to follow the rules,"

Borrowing the words of a infamous man “so much winning you may even get tired of winning and you’ll say please please, it’s too much winning. We can’t take anymore”. Clown show coming back to haunt him in November. 

 

[Berkshire]

6 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump's administration has lost 79 out of 85 cases involving federal agencies on deregulatory or policy issues tracked by the Institute for Policy Integrity,

So much winning, we can't stand it!  Stop it with the winning!  I mean, winning 6 out of 85 cases....7%.  That's some serious winning!  555555

[mlmcleod]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

"Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn't like me?" Trump asked on Twitter on Thursday.

It always has to be about Trump!  He invents new policies and regulations without precedence just to cater to his arch-conservative base and then wonders why almost all of them are thrown out in court.  The American constitution was designed to slow down the lawmaking process.  Trump's impatience just results in one bad policy or regulation after another. There are checks and balances regardless of who sits in the Oval Office.

[Proboscis]

5 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

The DACA decision, while welcome and a good step, is only a temporary relief. trump could simply order ag barr to issue a "more legal" order. That might take years again, and public opinion seems squarely in support of DACA, so who knows what he might do? Maybe ag barr could suspend Habeus Corpus for DACA recipients, and then build concentration camps for them? stephen miller's wet dream?

While many Americans are in favor of DACA, the sad truth is that Trump's base think that DACA is the thin edge of the wedge that would allow the whole world to come to the USA, steal their jobs and go on welfare. Sure, the last part is a little far-fetched given the level of welfare in the USA but the base still believes it!

[earlinclaifornia]

Running a government is not at all like bulling in real estate. Elect a realty star expect the results you have.

[AgMech Cowboy]

All very easily handled if Congress, who makes law would have settled this when Obama first made the Executive Order. Trump's main focus was to get Congress to do their job!!!

[natway09]

First job is take that "bloody phone" off "the goose"

What the heck is a President doing Tweeting at 2am 

On DACCA he will appeal (maybe get the paperwork right this time) but the last thing he will want is 

a decision before the election now., So the Admin will take it slow then no one looses face until

say, this time next year

[RJRS1301]

6 minutes ago, natway09 said:

First job is take that "bloody phone" off "the goose"

What the heck is a President doing Tweeting at 2am 

On DACCA he will appeal (maybe get the paperwork right this time) but the last thing he will want is 

a decision before the election now., So the Admin will take it slow then no one looses face until

say, this time next year

No one looses face? Hell he did that long before becoming POTUS, he just keeps loosing it time again, it is a wonder he even bothers to pick the manufactured hair off the floor

 

[Tropposurfer]

At least the Administration is consistent in something beside misogyny, racism, ignorance, projection, dumping, blaming, scapegoating, lying, stealing, and oh of course the Big T; Treason. Have I left anything out?

[Srikcir]

'The Supreme Court sided with the administration to allow the travel ban.'

To be fair the administration amended its ban twice since the original lower court decision against the administration and added a non-Muslim (African?) country to the ban by the time the case finally went to the SCOTUS.

The SCOTUS ruling was based appropiately on the latest revised version of the ban. Again, it was the administration's rush to invoke the original Muslim exclusive ban that made the ban a legal "poison pill."

[Srikcir]

"Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn't like me?"

Hey Trump: Black Robes Matter.

Bet you prefer White Robes.

 

[RJRS1301]

7 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

"Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn't like me?"

Hey Trump: Black Robes Matter.

Bet you prefer White Robes.

 

Ouch

[samran]

Sloppiness from this President? Who'd have thunk it?