DACA rescission failed basic administrative-law review

Date: 2020-06-18
Entry type: court-ruling
Current status: Final ruling on the 2017 rescission; later DACA litigation is separate.
Last reviewed: 2026-09-03

The Supreme Court held the administration's rescission arbitrary and capricious because DHS ignored important policy choices and reliance interests.

Entities and roles

factruled-unlawful
The Supreme Court held the 2017 DACA rescission reviewable and arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act because DHS failed to consider retaining forbearance and failed to address reliance interests; the Court rejected the equal-protection claim.
- Supreme Court of the United States: Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 591 U.S. 1 (2020)Syllabus at 1-8; opinion at 9-29