Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen | |
---|---|
Full case name | Martín Jonathan Batalla Vidal et al., Plaintiffs, v. Kirstjen M. Nielsen, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al., Defendants. State of New York et al., Plaintiffs, v. Donald Trump, President of the United States, et al., Defendants. |
Decided | February 13, 2018 |
Counsel for plaintiff(s) | National Immigration Law Center, Make the Road New York, Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization (LSO) of Yale Law School |
Citation(s) | 291 F.Supp.3d 260 (E.D.N.Y. 2018). |
Case history | |
Subsequent action(s) | Certiorari before judgment granted, McAleenan v. Vidal, 588 U.S. ___ (2019), consolidated under Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California |
Holding | |
Motion for Preliminary Injunction Granted | |
Court membership | |
Judge(s) sitting | Nicholas G. Garaufis |
Wolf v. Vidal (known at lower courts as Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen), 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a case that was filed to challenge the Trump Administration's rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Plaintiffs in the case are DACA recipients who argue that the rescission decision is unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Fifth Amendment. On February 13, 2018, Judge Garaufis in the Eastern District of New York addressed the question of whether the government offered a legally adequate reason for ending the DACA program. The court found that Defendants did not provide a legally adequate reason for ending the DACA program and that the decision to end DACA was arbitrary and capricious. Defendants have appealed the decision to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search