The Wall Street Journal published my Op-Ed, with the subtitle “Judges can’t override the president’s authority on ‘Dreamers’ just because he says offensive things.” I’m not a fan of the title, “Trump Talks, Schneiderman Sues,” but that is beyond my choosing.
President Trump’s decision to wind down the policy known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals—which shields from deportation nearly a million “Dreamers,” aliens brought to the U.S. as children—has drawn a predictable response. The president already faces lawsuits from 19 states, as well as complaints from the University of California and immigrants nationwide.
Leading the charge is Eric Schneiderman, New York’s state attorney general, who argues Mr. Trump lacks the authority to revoke DACA because he is racist. Seriously. In the complaint, filed last week, the attorneys general proffer other arguments based on the particulars of administrative law, but at bottom they assert that any action Mr. Trump takes that harms the Dreamers is tainted by his statements about Mexicans. That claim is not only legally unsound but a threat to the constitutional separation of powers.
The judiciary should rebuff this attempt to deprive the president of his lawful authority. It’s up to Congress to make the humane choice and enact legislation providing the Dreamers with legal status.