Oral arguments in federal court generate lots of light, but very little heat. One thing every appellate lawyer knows is not to predict the outcome of a case based upon oral arguments. The better legal reporters also understand that. Unfortunately, that maxim was not in display in the reporting surrounding the argument on April 17 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit over the government’s motion to lift Judge Andrew Hanen’s DAPA and DACA injunction.
Don’t be too alarmed by news that Judge Hanen refused to lift his stay on DAPA and expanded DACA. Headlines today blaze that the “Judge” has ruled again the administration. With the interest in the appeal of Judge Hanen’s injunction now (and still) pending before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, there can be no doubt that the headlines have caused confusion and consternation rather than clarity.