Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-587_5ifl.pdf
Page Number: 1

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2019 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is 
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued. 
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ET AL. v. 
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF 
CALIFORNIA ET AL. 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

No. 18–587.  Argued November 12, 2019—Decided June 18, 2020* 

In 2012, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a memo-
randum announcing an immigration relief program known as Deferred
Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which allows certain unauthor-
ized aliens who arrived in the United States as children to apply for a 
two-year  forbearance  of  removal.  Those  granted  such  relief  become
eligible  for  work  authorization  and  various  federal  benefits.    Some 
700,000 aliens have availed themselves of this opportunity. 

Two years later, DHS expanded DACA eligibility and created a re-
lated program known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and 
Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA).  If implemented, that program
would have made 4.3 million parents of U. S. citizens or lawful perma-
nent  residents  eligible  for  the  same  forbearance  from  removal,  work 
eligibility, and other benefits as DACA recipients.  Texas, joined by 25
other States, secured a nationwide preliminary injunction barring im-
plementation of both the DACA expansion and DAPA.  The Fifth Cir-
cuit upheld the injunction, concluding that the program violated the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which carefully defines eligi-
bility for benefits.  This Court affirmed by an equally divided vote, and 

—————— 

* Together with No. 18–588, Trump, President of the United States, et 
al. v. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People et al., 
on certiorari before judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for 
the District of Columbia Circuit, and No. 18–589, Wolf, Acting Secretary 
of Homeland Security, et al. v. Batalla Vidal et al., on certiorari before 
judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.