DACA’s day in court + A legal challenge to AB 5 + Charter school closures

Hannah Wiley

Good morning, alerters! I’m out for the next week, so you won’t hear from me until Wednesday. It’s vacation time, but I won’t be on a beach. I had to buy a new winter coat for my trip to the East Coast, but at least I’ll be warm touring all the Smithsonian museums I missed when I lived in Washington, D.C.

If you need to reach the Capitol bureau, please reach out to my colleagues, Sophia Bollag, Bryan Anderson and Adam Ashton (sbollag@sacbee.com, banderson@sacbee.com and aashton@sacbee.com).

IN DEFENSE OF DACA

California and President Donald Trump’s representatives duked it out at the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday.

The court heard oral arguments on the legality of the Obama-era program that shields immigrants who arrived illegally as kids from deportation, commonly referred to as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.

The California Department of Justice is leading a coalition of 21 attorneys general to protect the state’s 200,000 so-called “Dreamers” and the total 700,000 recipients who live throughout the country. Most arrived decades ago and, since Trump rescinded the program, have reiterated that they do not know their country of origin and consider the United States to be home.

California has battled the Trump administration in the courts since the president announced the policy reversal in 2017. The University of California, led by the woman who oversaw DACA’s creation, is also suing the federal government.

The arguments, summarized:

  • Noel Francisco, solicitor general for the federal government, argued that the Department of Homeland Security’s decision not to enforce the policy was within its jurisdiction as a law enforcement agency. Francisco also underscored Trump’s point that DACA was illegal.

“DACA was a temporary stop gap measure that, on its face, could be rescinded at any time,” Francisco said. “And the department’s reasonable concerns about its legality and its general opposition to broad non-enforcement policies provided more than a reasonable basis for ending it.”

  • Attorneys representing those in favor of the program said the termination of DACA “triggered abrupt, tangible, adverse consequences” and the government “utterly failed” to provide an “accurate, reasoned, rational and legally sound explanation” for its effort.

As expected, the justices appeared split, if not in favor of the Trump administration. Tipping the scale will likely fall on Chief Justice John Roberts’ shoulders.

Notable — Justice Sonia Sotomayor said she was having an “impossible time” with the argument to rescind the program, a decision she likened to a “choice to destroy lives.”

The court has until June 2020 to determine the fate of DACA. Janet Napolitano, president of the UC system and the former secretary of Homeland Security said she believed the case was “well briefed and well argued.” There are roughly 1,700 students in the system who are Dreamers.

“To make them subject to eviction from the only country they’ve known as home is not only legally required, but inconsistent with good immigration policy and inconsistent with our values in this country,” she said.

A SUIT AGAINST AB 5

It was only a matter of time.

During hearings and floor votes this year to approve a powerhouse labor law, Assembly Bill 5 was met with staunch opposition across several industries. Some of the most vocal opponents came from the trucking industry, whose drivers argued that the new law to consider independent contractors as employees would blunt agency over their schedules and disrupt their work flow.

So on Tuesday, the California Trucking Association filed suit against the state, alleging that the law violates the rights of owner-operators who will suffer “irreparable harm” under AB 5.

“AB 5 threatens the livelihood of more than 70,000 independent truckers,” the association’s CEO Shawn Yadon said. “The bill wrongfully restricts their ability to provide services as owner-operators and, therefore, runs afoul of federal law.”

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California and claims that the new law violates the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Act and the Federal Aviation Administration Act.

In a statement, AB 5 author and Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez said she expected the legal challenge.

“We expect big corporate interests — especially those who have misclassified their workers for years — to take this fight back to the place they know they can delay justice for workers: the courts,” Gonzalez said in a written statement.

‘ULTIMATE ACCOUNTABILITY’

The California Charter Schools Association publicly called for the non-renewal and closure of nine charter schools in the state, according to a press statement released on Tuesday.

The association said it was adhering to its “accountability framework,” which is used to identify schools with low academic performance and that are struggling to support students.

“All students – regardless of where they live, their race, income or educational needs – deserve access to a quality public education,” said Myrna Castrejón, the association’s president and CEO. “CCSA is laser-focused on closing the achievement gap and achieving equity for students throughout the state, which is why we have led the way in calling for schools to face the ultimate accountability of closure.”

The schools that were identified include the following, with their corresponding county:

  • Bridges Academy - Santa Clara

  • Castle Rock - Del Norte

  • Chawanakee Academy Charter - Madera

  • Delta Bridges Charter - San Joaquin

  • Delta Charter High School at Cabrillo College - Santa Cruz

  • Denair Elementary Charter Academy - Stanislaus

  • Pittman Charter - San Joaquin

  • Public Policy - Los Angeles

  • Roses in Concrete - Alameda

The Legislature this year passed additional accountability measures to crack down on charter schools in California.

A law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed in early October allows districts to consider the economic effects a proposed charter school would have on the community before it’s approved. And charter schools now have to conduct open meetings and make records public, thanks to a new law signed earlier this year.

QUOTE OF THE DAY

“Can you imagine if exactly 25 years ago, you had told me that because of Prop187 I would become an Assemlywoman, Chair of that @LatinoCaucus & that I’d write a video to tongue-and-cheek say ‘Thanks Pete Wilson,’ that he’d see it & call it snotty? Every young activist’s dream. Hahaha”

— Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, in a follow up to the caucus’ video reflection on a ballot measure that attempted to deny public benefits to immigrants who arrived in the country illegally.

Best of The Bee: