The district court determined that the states are likely to succeed on their procedural APA claim, so it temporarily enjoined implementation of the program. Texas v. United States, Civ. No. B-14-254, 2015 WL 648579 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 16, 2015).
The United States appealed the preliminary injunction and moved for a stay of the injunction pending resolution of the merits of that appeal. Because the government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its appeal of the injunction, we deny the motion for stay and the request to narrow the scope of the injunction. Read full text of the decision here.
First, the Court of Appeals rejected the Obama administration's argument that the 26 states challenging DACA and DAPA lack standing. The panel found that the burden on Texas in having to issue drivers licenses to DAPA status immigrants was "real and concrete."
Second, the court rejected the Obama administration's main argument, which is that the actions are truly discretionary and thus "committed to agency discretion by law." The court said that the executive actions didn't allow for any real exercise of discretion by agency employees, rather they simply were blanket changes to the immigration laws.
There are other provisions in Obama’s executive action on immigration, which will be considered by a different panel of judges of the Fifth Circuit the week of July 6, 2015. That panel could decide to lift the injunction.
The injunction could remain in place for the rest of President Obama’s term in office – unless it is lifted by the courts.
As a practical matter, the injunction prevents the government from processing DAPA and extended DACA applications. Only original 2012 DACA is still in effect.
It appears that DAPA and extended DACA may never become law.
Read the court opinion here.