On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments from three lawsuits demanding the Trump administration preserve Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. The Obama-era program has granted protection from deportation and a work permit to at least 700,000 undocumented people who were brought to the United States as children. The court’s conservative majority appeared poised to side with President Trump in ending the program, while some of the court’s liberal justices seemed skeptical of Trump’s efforts. In September 2017, the Trump administration announced it planned to terminate DACA, arguing the program was “illegal” and “unconstitutional,” but three lower courts disagreed and have kept the program alive, thanks to lawsuits filed by California, New York and D.C. Immigrant rights activists have been pushing the Supreme Court to save DACA, with dozens of immigrants with DACA recently taking part in a 16-day, 230-mile march from New York to the steps of the Supreme Court. We speak with Martín Batalla Vidal, the lead plaintiff in the New York federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s attempt to terminate DACA, and Trudy Rebert, a staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center, which also filed suit to block the Trump administration’s cancellation of DACA.
"The pain, the lies, and the broken treaties that have fallen upon the American Indian people has got to end."
“This is not a case about mismanagement, or sloppy accounting, or ‘mistakes,' Duncan Hunter intentionally took money that did not belong to him and used it for his own benefit.”
Lack of governmental oversight of factory farms has created a public health crisis of antibiotic-resistance diseases in people.