Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
ARGUMENT
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
iii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
U.S. CONSTITUTION
Article II, Section 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Article III, Section 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 9
Article VI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 8
STATUTES
5 U.S.C. § 706 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
8 U.S.C. § 1611(b)(2)-(3). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
CASES
Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31, 138 S. Ct.
2448 (2018). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) . . . . . . . . 11
Texas v. United States, 809 F.3d 134 (5th Cir.
2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Texas v. United States, 328 F.Supp.3d 662
(S.D.TX. 2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 25
Texas v. United States, 86 F. Supp. 3d 591
(S.D.TX. 2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 22
Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S.Ct. 2392 (2018). . . . . . . . 20
Trump v. IRAP and Trump v. Hawaii, 582
U.S. ____ 138 S. Ct. 34 (2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Washington v. Trump, 847 F.3d 1151 (9th Cir.
2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Bickel, The Least Dangerous Branch
(Yale Press: 1965) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of
England (U. Chi. Press, Facsimile ed.:
1765) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 12
iv
1
It is hereby certified that counsel for the parties have consented
to the filing of this brief; that counsel of record for all parties
received notice of the intention to file this brief at least 10 days
prior to the filing of it; that no counsel for a party authored this
brief in whole or in part; and that no person other than these
amici curiae, their members, or their counsel made a monetary
contribution to its preparation or submission.
2
STATEMENT
opinion.2
2
See J. Richwine, “Ninth Circuit Ruling on DACA Contains
Several False or Misleading Statements,” Center for Immigration
Studies (Nov. 27, 2018) (“In her ruling that the Trump
Administration must continue [DACA], Ninth Circuit Judge Kim
McLane Wardlaw makes several false or misleading statements
intended to portray DACA recipients positively.”)
4
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
ARGUMENT
3
See, e.g., Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31, 138 S. Ct. 2448 at 2497-
98 (2018) (Kagan, J., dissenting).
12
4
https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-jeff-
sessions-delivers-remarks-heritage-foundation-judicial-encroac
hment.
19
5
Regents, 279 F.Supp.3d at 1049.
20
6
“Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful
Permanent Residents.”
22
7
An illegal alien born in 1995, granted lawful status under
DACA, who fell into the “low earnings” tier (career average
earnings equal to $22,215) would receive annual Social Security
benefits of $12,276 in wage-indexed 2017 dollars. On the other
hand, a U.S. citizen born the same year in the “high earnings” tier
(career average earnings equal to $78,985) would pay 3.5 times
the taxes paid by the low income worker, but would receive
annual Social Security benefits of $26,802 — only 2.2 times the
benefits paid to the low income worker. See Office of the Chief
Actuary, Social Security Administration, Actuarial Note No.
2017.9 (July 2017), “Replacement Rates for Hypothetical Retired
25
Workers,” Table C.
8
See Congressional Research Service, “Social Security Benefits
for Noncitizens” (Nov. 17, 2016) at 9.
9
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
recently confirmed that:
unlawfully present aliens would normally be
barred from receiving Social Security retirement
benefits, Social Security disability benefits, and
health insurance under Part A of the Medicare
program because these are federal public benefits.
DACA, however, by making its recipients lawfully
present, removes an otherwise insurmountable
roadblock to their receipt of Social Security,
Medicare, and other benefits. [Texas, 328
F.Supp.3d at 675.]
10
The Social Security Board of Trustees 2018 Annual Report
anticipates the rescission of DACA will have a negligible impact
on the long-term health of the Social Security system — certainly
not the significant losses assumed by the New York District
Court. See 2018 Annual Report of the Trustees (June 5, 2018) at
37, https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/2018/ tr2018.pdf.
26
CONCLUSION
Respectfully submitted,