`_______________
`
`No. 18-587
`
`DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
`ET AL., PETITIONERS
`
`v.
`
`REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL.
`_______________
`
`ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
`TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
`_______________
`
`No. 18-588
`
`DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
`STATES, ET AL., PETITIONERS
`
`v.
`
`NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT
`OF COLORED PEOPLE, ET AL.
`_______________
`
`ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI BEFORE JUDGMENT
`TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
`_______________
`
`No. 18-589
`
`KEVIN K. MCALEENAN, ACTING SECRETARY OF
`HOMELAND SECURITY, ET AL., PETITIONERS
`
`v.
`
`MARTIN JONATHAN BATALLA VIDAL, ET AL.
`_______________
`
`ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI BEFORE JUDGMENT
`TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
`_______________
`
`
`
`
`2
`RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR EXPANDED ARGUMENT
`_______________
`Pursuant to Rules 21.4 and 28.4 of the Rules of this Court,
`
`the Solicitor General, on behalf of petitioners, respectfully
`submits this response to the State of Texas’s motion for expanded
`argument in this case. This dispute concerns the policy of
`immigration enforcement discretion known as Deferred Action for
`Childhood Arrivals (DACA). In September 2017, the Department of
`Homeland Security (DHS) instituted an orderly wind-down of the
`DACA policy. The questions presented are (1) whether DHS’s
`decision to wind down the DACA policy is judicially reviewable and
`(2) whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.
`The government argues that the decision is not judicially
`reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701 et
`seq., and that DHS’s decision is lawful in any event. Texas has
`filed an amicus brief arguing that DHS’s decision is judicially
`reviewable, but agreeing with the government that the decision is
`lawful. Texas now moves the Court to expand the oral argument to
`allow Texas ten minutes of argument time.
`
`Because Texas supports respondents on one question presented
`(reviewability) and supports petitioners on the other question
`(lawfulness of the rescission), the government opposes any change
`in the allotted argument time that would result either in a
`reduction in the government’s allotted 30 minutes of argument time
`or in the government’s receiving less time than respondents. The
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`government does not understand Texas to be making any such request,
`but to be asking only that ten additional minutes be added to the
`argument to enable its participation. Accordingly, as stated in
`Texas’s motion, the government neither consents to nor opposes
`that request.
`
`Respectfully submitted.
`
`
`
`
`
`SEPTEMBER 2019
`
`NOEL J. FRANCISCO
` Solicitor General
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
