Reversing in part district court's partial grant of summary judgment to Government in action challenging DHS's rescission of DACA. The Court held that the INA did not bar judicial review; the rescission was not an unreviewable action committed to agency discretion by law; the rescission was a general statement of policy not subject to notice and comment rulemaking; DHS's failure to give adequate reasoning for the rescission rendered it arbitrary and capricious; and DHS was not equitably estopped from sharing DACA applicant information. Judge Richardson dissented, determining that the rescission was unreviewable because it was committed to agency discretion and that Plaintiffs' constitutional claims also failed.

Date of Decision