Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-587_5ifl.pdf
Page Number: 41.0

Cite as:  591 U. S. ____ (2020) 

3 

Opinion of THOMAS, J. 

Today’s decision must be recognized for what it is: an ef-
fort  to  avoid  a  politically  controversial  but  legally  correct
decision.  The Court could have made clear that the solution 
respondents seek must come from the Legislative Branch. 
Instead,  the  majority  has  decided  to  prolong  DHS’  initial 
overreach  by  providing  a  stopgap  measure  of  its  own.    In 
doing so, it has given the green light for future political bat-
tles to be fought in this Court rather than where they right-
fully belong—the political branches.  Such timidity forsakes
the Court’s duty to apply the law according to neutral prin-
ciples, and the ripple effects of the majority’s error will be 
felt throughout our system of self-government. 

Perhaps even more unfortunately, the majority’s holding 
creates  perverse  incentives,  particularly  for  outgoing  ad-
ministrations.  Under the auspices of today’s decision, ad-
ministrations  can  bind  their  successors  by  unlawfully
adopting  significant  legal  changes  through  Executive
Branch agency memoranda.  Even if the agency lacked au-
thority to effectuate the changes, the changes cannot be un-
done by the same agency in a successor administration un-
less the successor provides sufficient policy justifications to
the satisfaction of this Court.  In other words, the majority
erroneously holds that the agency is not only permitted, but
required,  to  continue  administering  unlawful  programs
that it inherited from a previous administration.  I respect-
fully dissent in part.1 

I 
A 
In 2012, after more than two dozen attempts by Congress
to  grant  lawful  status  to  aliens  who  were  brought  to  this 
country as children,2 the then-Secretary of Homeland Secu-
rity Janet Napolitano announced, by memorandum, a new 

—————— 

1 I concur in the judgment insofar as the majority rejects respondents’ 

equal protection claim. 

2 See  Immigrant  Children’s  Educational  Advancement  and  Dropout