Monday, the Government filed in the Supreme Court a highly unusual petition for writ of certiorari before judgment in the case challenging DHS's recission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. In plain English, they asked the high court to take the case up before the lower federal court was finished with it. Such petitions are rarely made and even more rarely granted.*
Well, it's no longer "before judgment." The Ninth Circuit today issued its opinion, against the Government. Amy Howe notes, "The ruling means not only that the Supreme Court is now more likely to
take up the DACA dispute, but that it could do so this term." I agree.
The SCOTUS case is Dept. of Homeland Security v. Regents of the Univ. of California, No. 18-587.
* In cases coming to SCOTUS from the state courts, such petitions are forbidden, at least in theory. Congress has limited the Supreme Court's jurisdiction in state cases to review of final judgments. See 28 U.S.C. ยง1257. In practice, the Supreme Court has been less than rigid on the question of what is a "final judgment."
Still wondering the standing of University of California . . . .
It doesn't seem to have any enforceable right in the continued presence of those whose presence in the USA is illegal.