A federal judge in California ordered the Trump administration on Tuesday to keep in place the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which protects undocumented immigrants who entered the country as children from deportation and allows them to work legally, while a lawsuit proceeds.

The order, signed by U.S. District Judge Williams Alsup, marks a major triumph for immigrant rights groups who have rallied around the program that benefits nearly 700,000 people.

The preliminary injunction on Trump’s cancellation of DACA requires the Department of Homeland Security “to maintain the DACA program on a nationwide basis on the same terms and conditions as were in effect before the rescission on September 5, 2017” ― including allowing those who already benefit from DACA to apply to renew their status.

The order does not, however, allow people who have never held DACA protections to apply as new applicants.

“Dreamers’ lives were thrown into chaos when the Trump administration tried to terminate the DACA program without obeying the law,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) said in a statement. “Today’s ruling is a huge step in the right direction.

The Trump administration “looks forward to vindicating its position in further litigation,” Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement.

“Tonight’s order doesn’t change the Department of Justice’s position on the facts,” the statement said. “DACA was implemented unilaterally after Congress declined to extend these benefits to this same group of illegal aliens.”

Before the order, the program was scheduled to begin phasing out on March 5.

Alsup is presiding over five lawsuits challenging the legality of Trump’s termination of DACA that were consolidated into one in the Northern District of California. The state of California, the Regents of the University of California, the city of San José and several DACA recipients are among those suing in an attempt to preserve the program.

The lawsuits argue that the White House flouted the process for terminating the program in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and that the cancellation was based on flawed legal logic.

The Obama administration used executive action to create the DACA program in 2012, allowing undocumented immigrants who arrived as children or young teenagers to apply to work legally in the country and avoid deportation for a renewable two-year period.

The Trump administration announced in September, however, that it would cancel the program, citing a threat from a coalition of 10 states, led by Texas, to challenge the program’s constitutionality. </s> A federal judge in California issued a nationwide injunction Tuesday night blocking the Trump administration from dismantling the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which protects immigrants brought to the U.S. at a young age from deportation.

The judge, William Alsup of the Federal District Court in San Francisco, ruled that the Trump administration must allow the nearly 690,000 Dreamers to continue to renew their protections while the legal challenge worked its way through court. The administration would not be required to accept new applications.

Under the administration’s decision announced in September, the Department of Homeland Security would stop accepting applications after Oct. 5, and permits that expired after March 5 would not be renewed.

According to NBC News, Alsup chastised DHS for failing to present any analysis of the damage its order would do to the hundreds of thousands of Dreamers in the country, and he called the government’s argument that the DHS does not and did not have the right to run the program “arbitrary” and “capricious.”

A Justice Department spokesperson said Tuesday after the ruling that the agency still believes it has the power to end the program, which it considers illegal overreach by the previous administration, according to the Associated Press.

Alsup’s ruling came as he considered five lawsuits filed in Northern California. One of the lawsuits was filed by four states, including California, and another was filed by the University of California system, according to the AP.

President Obama created DACA in 2012, and many Republicans have argued since then that the action was unconstitutional. Donald Trump has previously expressed public support for the program in tweets—tweets Alsip cited in his decision, according to the New York Times.

The ruling came the same day as a bipartisan meeting in which Trump and members of Congress sought to work out an immigration deal to decide the fate of the Dreamers. Republicans and Democrats remain divided on the issue, and very little was actually accomplished.

The administration could appeal the ruling, meaning it is possible for the program could still be phased out as scheduled.

You depend on Slate for sharp, distinctive coverage of the latest developments in politics and culture. Now we need to ask for your support. Our work is more urgent than ever and is reaching more readers—but online advertising revenues don’t fully cover our costs, and we don’t have print subscribers to help keep us afloat. So we need your help. If you think Slate’s work matters, become a Slate Plus member. You’ll get exclusive members-only content and a suite of great benefits—and you’ll help secure Slate’s future. Join Slate Plus </s> In a victory for Dreamers nationwide, a San Francisco judge on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration’s rescinding of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, ordering the administration to resume accepting DACA applications as the underlying case continues in federal court.

The district court ruling granted California Attorney General Xavier Becerra a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration over its Sept. 5 decision to end the program, ramping up a heated debate over the fate of 800,000 young, undocumented immigrants. Becerra — joined by the attorney generals for Maine, Maryland, and Minnesota; the University of California; Santa Clara County; the city of San Jose, individual Dreamers and other plaintiffs — filed a lawsuit against the administration in November, arguing that ending the program caused irreparable harm to DACA recipients and the states in which they live.

“Dreamers’ lives were thrown into chaos when the Trump administration tried to terminate the DACA program without obeying the law,” Becerra said in a statement Tuesday. “Tonight’s ruling is a huge step in the right direction. America is and has been home to Dreamers who courageously came forward, applied for DACA and did everything the federal government asked of them. They followed DACA’s rules, they succeeded in school, at work and in business, and they have contributed in building a better America. We will fight at every turn for their rights and opportunities so they may continue to contribute to America.”

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.

Trump announced the end of the program on Sept. 5 and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services stopped taking renewal applications in early October. Congress has until March 5 to salvage the Obama-era program and protect an estimated 800,000 undocumented immigrants who grew up in the U.S. from deportation.

Tuesday’s decision is the latest in a monthslong battle surrounding DACA, one that has pitted Democrats in Congress against Republican lawmakers who say the program is an overreach of power. </s> SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday night temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s decision to end a program protecting young immigrants from deportation.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup granted a request by California and other plaintiffs to prevent President Donald Trump from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program while their lawsuits play out in court.

Alsup said lawyers in favor of DACA clearly demonstrated that the young immigrants “were likely to suffer serious, irreparable harm” without court action. The judge also said the lawyers have a strong chance of succeeding at trial.

DACA has protected about 800,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas. The program includes hundreds of thousands of college-age students.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced in September that the program would be phased out, saying former President Barack Obama had exceeded his authority when he implemented it in 2012.

Alsup considered five separate lawsuits filed in Northern California, including one by the state and another by the governing board of the University of California school system.

During a court hearing on Dec. 20, the judge grilled an attorney for the Department of Justice over the government’s justification for ending DACA, saying many people had come to rely on it and faced a “real” and “palpable” hardship from its loss.

Alsup also questioned whether the administration had conducted a thorough review before ending the program.

Brad Rosenberg, a Justice Department attorney, said the administration considered the effects of ending DACA and decided to phase it out over time instead of cutting it immediately.

DACA recipients will be allowed to stay in the U.S. for the remainder of their two-year authorizations. Any recipient whose status was due to expire within six months also got a month to apply for another two-year term.

The Justice Department said in court documents that DACA was facing the possibility of an abrupt end by court order, but Alsup was critical of that argument.

People took out loans, enrolled in school and even made decisions about whether to get married and start families on the basis of DACA and now face “horrific” consequences from the loss of the program, said Jeffrey Davidson, an attorney for the University of California governing board.

“The government considered none of this at all when they decided to rescind DACA,” he said at the hearing.

DACA recipients are commonly referred to as “dreamers,” based on never-passed proposals in Congress called the DREAM Act that would have provided similar protections for young immigrants. </s> SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday night temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s decision to end a program protecting young immigrants from deportation.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup granted a request by California and other plaintiffs to prevent President Donald Trump from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program while their lawsuits play out in court.

Alsup said lawyers in favor of DACA clearly demonstrated that the young immigrants “were likely to suffer serious, irreparable harm” without court action. The judge also said the lawyers have a strong chance of succeeding at trial.

DACA has protected about 800,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas. The program includes hundreds of thousands of college-age students.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced in September that the program would be phased out, saying former President Barack Obama had exceeded his authority when he implemented it in 2012.

On Tuesday, the Department of Justice said the judge’s decision doesn’t change the fact that the program was an illegal circumvention of Congress, and it is within the agency’s power to end it.

“The Justice Department will continue to vigorously defend this position, and looks forward to vindicating its position in further litigation,” department spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement.

Alsup considered five separate lawsuits filed in Northern California, including one by the California and three other states, and another by the governing board of the University of California school system.

“DACA covers a class of immigrants whose presence, seemingly all agree, pose the least, if any, threat and allows them to sign up for honest labor on the condition of continued good behavior,” Alsup wrote in his decision. “This has become an important program for DACA recipients and their families, for the employers who hire them, for our tax treasuries, and for our economy.”

That echoed the judge’s comments from a court hearing on Dec. 20, when he grilled an attorney for the Department of Justice over the government’s justification for ending DACA, saying many people had come to rely on it and faced a “real” and “palpable” hardship from its loss.

Alsup also questioned whether the administration had conducted a thorough review before ending the program.

Brad Rosenberg, a Justice Department attorney, said the administration considered the effects of ending DACA and decided to phase it out over time instead of cutting it immediately.

DACA recipients will be allowed to stay in the U.S. for the remainder of their two-year authorizations. Any recipient whose status was due to expire within six months also got a month to apply for another two-year term.

The Justice Department said in court documents that DACA was facing the possibility of an abrupt end by court order, but Alsup was critical of that argument.

People took out loans, enrolled in school and even made decisions about whether to get married and start families on the basis of DACA and now face “horrific” consequences from the loss of the program, said Jeffrey Davidson, an attorney for the University of California governing board.

“The government considered none of this at all when they decided to rescind DACA,” he said at the hearing.

The University of California said in a statement after the decision that “UC’s DACA students represent the very best of our country and are a key part of California and our nation’s future.”

The statement says the UC system will persist in legal challenges to the end of the program and will seek permanent protection for the young immigrants.

DACA recipients are commonly referred to as “dreamers,” based on never-passed proposals in Congress called the DREAM Act that would have provided similar protections for young immigrants.

“Dreamers lives were thrown into chaos when the Trump administration tried to terminate the DACA program without obeying the law,” California Attorney General Becerra said in a statement after Tuesday’s decision. “Tonight’s ruling is a huge step in the right direction.” </s> Fifteen states and the District of Columbia on sued Wednesday to block President Donald Trump's plan to end a program protecting young immigrants from deportation — an act Washington state's attorney general called "a dark time for our country."

The lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of New York. The plaintiffs were New York, Massachusetts, Washington, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Virginia.

On Tuesday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said a program, known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or DACA, will end in six months to give Congress time to find a legislative solution for the immigrants.

The participants were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas.

Those already enrolled in DACA remain covered until their permits expire. If their permits expire before March, 5, 2018, they are eligible to renew them for another two years as long as they apply by Oct. 5. But the program isn't accepting new applications.

Opponents of the program said they are pleased with the Trump administration's decision. They called DACA an unconstitutional abuse of executive power but proponents of the program said the move by Trump was cruel.

Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson said the action violates the due process rights of the immigrants. He said he fears the information the immigrants provided the government to participate in DACA could be used against them.

"It's outrageous, it's not right," an emotional Ferguson said at a news conference in Seattle. "As attorney general for the state of Washington, I have a hammer, it's the law."

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee joined Ferguson at the news conference and said "this is one more of a long train of abuses that this president has attempted to foist on this great nation."

Earlier this year, Ferguson sued Trump over the initial travel ban, which resulted in a federal judge blocking nationwide enforcement. </s> Fifteen states and the District of Columbia sued Wednesday to block President Donald Trump's plan to end a program protecting young immigrants from deportation — an act Washington state's attorney general called part of a "dark time for our country."

The lawsuit filed in federal court in Brooklyn asked a judge to conclude that the president's action involving the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, is unconstitutional.

It called the move "a culmination of President Trump's oft-stated commitments ... to punish and disparage people with Mexican roots."

Rescinding DACA will also injure state-run colleges and universities, upset workplaces and damage companies and economies that include immigrants covered under the program, the lawsuit says.

"The consequence of the president's animus-driven decision is that approximately 800,000 persons who have availed themselves of the program will ultimately lose its protections" and be exposed to deportation, the lawsuit says.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Tuesday the program will end in six months so Congress can have time to find a legislative solution for the people in the program, who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are New York, Massachusetts, Washington, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Virginia.

California, one of the most solid Democratic states, was noticeably absent.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra plans to file a separate lawsuit because a quarter of DACA recipients are California residents, his spokeswoman Bethany Lesser said.

Becerra's office has not said when the lawsuit will be filed or whether it will include different legal arguments.

Under the move by Trump, people already enrolled in DACA remain covered until their permits expire. If that happens before March 5, they are eligible to renew them for another two years as long as they apply by Oct. 5. But the program isn't accepting new applications.

Opponents of the program said they are pleased with the Trump administration's decision. They called DACA an unconstitutional abuse of executive power.

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee and Attorney General Bob Ferguson, both Democrats, called Trump's action cruel and outrageous, given that the decision was announced by Sessions rather than the president himself.

A half-dozen beneficiaries of DACA — young adults from Mexico, Venezuela, Peru and elsewhere, including some now working at law firms or for the state Legislature — flanked Inslee and Ferguson at a news conference in Seattle announcing the lawsuit.

"It's outrageous, it's not right," an emotional Ferguson said. "As attorney general for the state of Washington, I have a hammer, it's the law."

Inslee said, "This is one more of a long train of abuses that this president has attempted to foist on this great nation."

Earlier this year, Ferguson sued Trump over his travel ban, prompting a federal judge to block nationwide enforcement. </s> A federal judge in California ordered the Trump administration to maintain the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program late Tuesday, an Obama-era amnesty policy that extends legal status to 800,000 illegal immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children.

The ruling could ensure DACA’s security as President Donald Trump attempts to reach an immigration deal with Democratic lawmakers. The program was scheduled to phase out in March.

“Tonight’s order doesn’t change the Department of Justice’s position on the facts: DACA was implemented unilaterally after Congress declined to extend these benefits to this same group of illegal aliens,” said Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley. “As such, it was an unlawful circumvention of Congress, and was susceptible to the same legal challenges that effectively ended DACA.”

“The Justice Department will continue to vigorously defend this position, and looks forward to vindicating its position in further litigation,” he added.

TRENDING: LiAngelo Ball Tells Truth About The Day He Said ‘Thank You’ To President

The administration justified DACA’s termination on separation of powers grounds, arguing only Congress could authorize such a program.

Alsup strongly rejected this view, pointing to a 2014 Justice Department memo purporting to show that DACA’s features are rooted in Supreme Court case law or related powers granted by Congress.

Since Alsup concluded the program’s rescission was based on a flawed legal premise, he said the action was “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, (and) otherwise not in accordance with law.”

Alsup further noted that Trump himself has determined DACA serves the public interest, citing two September 2017 tweets in which the president expressed support for so-called “Dreamers.”

“We seem to be in the unusual position wherein the ultimate authority over the agency, the chief executive, publicly favors the very program the agency has ended,” the judge wrote.

The order does not require the administration to process new DACA applications and allows law enforcement to remove any DACA recipient believed to pose a threat to national security or public safety.

RELATED: Matt Drudge Just Revealed How Much The Trump Wall Would Really Cost America

The Trump administration can ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review Alsup’s decision.

The Supreme Court recently lifted a sweeping discovery order Alsup issued in the DACA litigation. The judge ordered the Trump administration to release all internal documents relating to the program’s cancellation, despite the government’s insistence that any such records were privileged. The justices concluded that Alsup’s order was overly broad, and ordered him to reconsider the administration’s arguments.

The University of California system brought the suit challenging DACA’s termination. The system is led by Janet Napolitano, the former secretary of Homeland Security who presided over DACA’s original promulgation during the Obama administration.

The ruling can be viewed here.

A version of this article previously appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website. </s> A federal judge in California blocked President Trump’s planned phaseout of the Obama-era DACA deportation amnesty in a ruling late Tuesday that could upend the negotiations on Capitol Hill over “Dreamers” future.

Judge William Alsup, a Clinton appointee to the bench, ruled the DACA program legal — the first court to do so — and said the administration illegally cut corners in canceling it.

He ordered the administration to allow illegal immigrants to renew their DACA applications just as they would have under President Obama.

“The agency shall post reasonable public notice that it will resume receiving DACA renewal applications and prescribe a process consistent with this order,” the judge said.

The ruling is a major victory for immigrant-rights groups who had challenged Mr. Trump’s phaseout.

One of those challengers was former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who created the DACA program in 2012, without going through the full notice-and-comment period. Ms. Napolitano said that while her action was legal, canceling DACA without notice-and-comment was not legal.

Judge Alsup agreed with Ms. Napolitano, who sued in her new role as president of the University of California system, along with the state of California and several other challengers.

The judge, in his ruling, said the 2012 DACA program, while not approved by any law, appeared to be supported by years of practice in administrations of both parties.

“In extending programmatic deferred action to DACA enrollees, the agency acted within the scope of this long and recognized practice,” the judge said.

The ruling contradicts other federal judges, including the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which rules a program similar to DACA was illegal because it not only didn’t go through notice-and-comment, but it also was contrary to immigration law.

Judge Alsup said the DACA case was different enough that he didn’t feel bound by that logic, and he blasted the Trump administration for caving to legal threats from Texas and other states opposed to DACA based on that circuit’s ruling.

Mr. Trump and his aides had concluded the program was illegal and ordered a six-month phaseout, concluding March 5.

In a series of Tweets, he said the 5th Circuit’s ruling on the broader 2014 Obama immigration amnesty was based heavily on the operations of DACA.

“The upshot is that because the Trump Administration understood executive power in a more narrow fashion than did the Obama administration, the former acted arbitrarily and capricious. I’ve never seen anything quite like it,” he said.

Mr. Trump’s decision to phase out DACA set off a scramble on Capitol Hill, where Democrats and Republicans began to search for a more permanent solution for nearly 700,000 people still protected by the DACA program.

Those conversations came to a head Tuesday when Mr. Trump convened a meeting at the White House with Democrats and Republicans. Both sides agreed to try to reach an agreement, with Democrats insisting a speedy resolution was needed to beat Mr. Trump’s phaseout.

If Judge Alsup’s ruling stands, it could eliminate the need for speed, upending those negotiations.

Judge Alsup did allow some exceptions to his ruling reinstating DACA. While current and past recipients could apply for renewal, he said no people who hadn’t applied for DACA before could join now.

DACA recipients can also still be deported if the government has good reason, the judge said.

And he said the government doesn’t have to continue issuing “advance parole” to DACA recipients. Many of those recipients had used the advance parole system as a backdoor pathway to citizenship under Mr. Obama.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California issues a nationwide injunction blocking the rescission of the DACA program, ordering the Trump administration to restart and maintain the program as the legal challenge(s) to the president's decision go forward.