Tiny Red HandsBack

Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 591 U.S. 1 (2020)

This primary source from Supreme Court of the United States supports 1 claim across 1 ledger entry.

Publisher
Supreme Court of the United States
Published
2020-06-18
Accessed
2026-09-03
Source quality
primary

All sources · Open original source

Claims supported by this source

  1. 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.

    Syllabus at 1-8; opinion at 9-29

    DACA rescission failed basic administrative-law review · Final ruling on the 2017 rescission; later DACA litigation is separate. · reviewed 2026-09-03