What part of the ruling said that DACA was illegal?
My understanding was that they said that the current administration did have the power to end DACA, but that the justification they gave for doing so (that DACA was illegal) was incorrect, so it could not be ended until they gave a proper justification for it.
>Today Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by the court’s four more liberal justices, agreed with the challengers that the decision to terminate DACA violated the APA. Before they could reach that key issue in the case, however, they had to dispose of a threshold question: whether courts have the power to review the decision to end DACA in the first place.
>Roberts reiterated that the court was not deciding “whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies.” Instead, he stressed, the court addressed “only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action” – which, in the majority’s view, it did not.
My understanding was that they said that the current administration did have the power to end DACA, but that the justification they gave for doing so (that DACA was illegal) was incorrect, so it could not be ended until they gave a proper justification for it.