Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. United States District Court

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided November 16, 2017No. 17-72917Published

1DissentWatford, Circuit Judge

I understand why the district court ordered the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to provide a more fulsome administrative record. The agency’s decision to rescind DACA will profoundly disrupt the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, and a policy shift of that magnitude presumably would not have been made without extensive study and analysis beforehand. But the desire for greater insight into how DHS arrived at its decision is not a legitimate basis for ordering the agency to expand the administrative record, unless the plaintiffs make a threshold factual showing justifying such…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Camp v. PittsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Cheney v. United States District Court for District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Public Power Council v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  4. In Re Subpoena Duces Tecum Served on the Office of the Comptroller of the CurrencyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
  5. Kansas State Network, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API