Sign up for our newsletter

Below is a report that DML News gives a 4 OUT OF 4 STARS trustworthiness rating. We base this rating on the following criteria:

  • Provides named sources
  • Reported by more than one notable outlet
  • Does not insert opinion or leading words
  • Includes supporting video, direct statements, or photos

Click here to read more about our rating system.

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service on the internet, DML News App offers the following information published by DAILYCALLER.COM:

A closely divided Supreme Court seemed inclined to uphold President Donald Trump’s bid to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program during arguments Tuesday morning.

The high court’s conservative majority appeared to think the administration has provided an adequate basis for ending the policy, and in spaces even wondered if the courts have power to review the dispute.

The article goes on to state the following:

Chief Justice John Roberts noted that the high court in 2016 affirmed a decision of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that blocked an Obama-era amnesty program called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA). The 5th Circuit’s ruling and the Supreme Court’s subsequent affirmance provide a sufficient rationale for ending DACA, which is largely similar to DAPA, Roberts suggested.

“Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, and Justice Samuel Alito, a George W. Bush appointee, seemed concerned that authorizing a review could give judges too much power over executive agency decisions,” The Hill reported. “‘Can you help me understand what is the limiting principle?’ Gorsuch asked Theodore Olson, one of two lawyers arguing to preserve DACA. ‘I hear a lot of facts, sympathetic facts, you put out there, and they speak to all of us. But what’s the limiting principle.'”

Clinton appointee Justice Stephen Breyer also questioned the court’s power to review Trump’s decision.

“I’m saying honestly,” Breyer said, “I am struggling to get the right rule.”

“But the oral arguments highlighted the sharp ideological split, with many of the court’s liberal members inclined to view the DACA repeal as falling within the court’s purview,” The Hill noted, adding that the word “reliance” was mentioned 46 times during oral arguments.

Obama appointee Justice Sonia Sotomayor wondered whether the Trump administration weighed the impact of the change on DACA recipients.

“There’s a whole lot of reliance interests that weren’t looked at, including the current president telling DACA-eligible people that they were safe under him and that he would find a way to keep them here,” Sotomayor said to Solicitor General Noel Francisco, who was arguing the case on for the Trump administration.

“Where is all of this really considered and weighed?” she asked. “Where is the political decision made clearly, that this is not about the law, this is about our choice to destroy lives.”

To get more information about this article, please visit DAILYCALLER.COM.

Sign up for our newsletter
Previous articleREPORT: First Member of Congress Names Alleged ‘Whistleblower’: ‘He’s Not Voldemort’
Next articleVIDEO: W&T 11.20.19: Scum steal 100k meals from veterans. Let’s catch them!!