Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal.
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal..
The Supreme Court reviewed the Department of Homeland Security's decision to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. The Court found that the rescission was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because it failed to consider important aspects of the issue, such as reliance interests. The Court also rejected claims that the rescission violated the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal..
The Court held that the rescission of DACA was arbitrary and capricious under the APA. The Court also held that the equal protection claim was not supported by sufficient allegations.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal.. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Administrative Law is relevant to Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal.
The case primarily concerns the procedural requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) for rescinding DACA.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The APA 'sets forth the procedures by which federal agencies are accountable to the public and their actions subject to review by the courts.'
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal.
The Court's decision focused on whether the rescission of DACA complied with procedural requirements, implicating procedural due process concerns.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action.
-
Why Equal Protection is relevant to Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal.
The Court addressed and rejected claims that the rescission of DACA violated the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Chief Justice, joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, and Justice Kagan, concluded in Part IV that respondents' claims fail to establish a plausible inference that the rescission was motivated by animus in violation of the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. that support the summary and concepts above.
DHS's decision to rescind DACA was arbitrary and capricious under the APA.
The judgment in No. 18–587 is vacated in part and reversed in part.
Respondents' claims fail to establish a plausible inference that the rescission was motivated by animus.
