United States v. Texas

Whether states that subsidize aliens with deferred action have Article III standing and a cause of action under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to challenge the Department of Homeland Security’s guidance, which established a process to postpone deportation for certain aliens.

Texas and twenty-five other states seek injunctive relief against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to prevent Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) from being implemented, and to prevent the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) from being expanded.

The DHS Secretary issued a directive to provide legal presence for certain illegal aliens who were parents of children who are U.S. citizens or have permanent resident alien status. The policy would postpone deportation of certain illegal aliens, who could now be granted work permits and could also qualify for public benefits.

The district court granted a preliminary injunction, stating DAPA’s implementation would violate the Administrative Procedure Act’s notice and comment requirements. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the federal government’s motion to stay the injunction.

The Court of Appeals held that Texas had Article III standing, judicial review was available under the APA; Texas would likely succeed on the merits of claim that “policy-directive” and “agency rule” exemptions from APA notice and comments are inapplicable; that Texas would likely succeed on the merits of a substantive APA claim; and an injunction was warranted.