San Francisco-based U.S. District Court judge William Alsup ordered the Donald Trump administration to resume accepting renewal applications for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program | Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images Judge blocks Trump wind-down of Dreamers program Injunction says feds must keep renewing permits for DACA recipients.

A federal judge has blocked President Donald Trump's effort to shut-down the Obama-era program that provides quasi-legal status and work permits to foreigners who entered the U.S. illegally as children.

In a ruling Tuesday evening, San Francisco-based U.S. District Court judge William Alsup ordered the administration to resume accepting renewal applications for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, better known as DACA.


Alsup said Attorney General Jeff Sessions' conclusion that the program was illegal appeared to be "based on a flawed legal premise."

Unless halted by a higher court, the ruling will allow former DACA recipients who failed to renew by an October 5 deadline a chance to submit renewal applications and will also require the administration to allow renewal of applications expiring in the future. The decision does not require officials to accept new applications for DACA status.

If the judge's order remains in place, it could also roil ongoing legislative efforts on DACA by undercutting the urgency many advocates have expressed, calling for legislation to be passed before large numbers of Dreamers begin losing their protected status in March.

On Wednesday morning, Trump criticized the judiciary after the ruling.

"It just shows everyone how broken and unfair our Court System is when the opposing side in a case (such as DACA)...almost always wins before being reversed by higher courts," Trump tweeted.

Alsup's nationwide preliminary injunction order came on the same day many of those advocates were at the White House for a negotiating session aimed at hashing out the contours of a bill that would give DACA recipients a reprieve.

Trump's comments during an unusually-protracted photo op led to some confusion about his position, but he later tweeted that any fix on DACA must include significant funding for the border wall that he promised during his campaign.

Morning Shift newsletter Get the latest on employment and immigration, every weekday morning — in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

"As I made very clear today, our country needs the security of the Wall on the Southern border, which must be part of any DACA approval," Trump wrote.

Alsup didn't reference the meeting in his decision, but he did say there were signs that the administration's decision to wind down DACA was not the product of legal necessity but rather an attempt to improve the White House's bargaining position.

The judge, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, said Trump gave "credence" to that claim when he tweeted last month: “The Democrats have been told, and fully understand, that there can be no DACA without the desperately needed WALL at the Southern Border and an END to the horrible Chain Migration & ridiculous Lottery System of Immigration etc. We must protect our Country at all cost!”

The Trump administration could seek a stay of the ruling from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court. It's possible the Supreme Court would move to put the decision on hold pending further review. Just last month, the justices voted, 5-4, to halt orders from Alsup requiring the administration to disclose more details about how it arrived at the decision to rescind DACA.

White House spokespeople did not respond to requests for comment on the new ruling, but Justice Department spokesman Devin O'Malley said the administration will continue to press its legal case for ending DACA.

However, he did not say whether that would involve an immediate appeal.

"Today’s order doesn’t change the Department of Justice’s position on the facts: DACA was implemented unilaterally after Congress declined to extend these benefits to this same group of illegal aliens. As such, it was an unlawful circumvention of Congress, and was susceptible to the same legal challenges that effectively ended DAPA," O'Malley said in a statement.

"The Department of Homeland Security therefore acted within its lawful authority in deciding to wind down DACA in an orderly manner. Promoting and enforcing the rule of law is vital to protecting a nation, its borders, and its citizens. The Justice Department will continue to vigorously defend this position, and looks forward to vindicating its position in further litigation.”

Some lawyers said they would not be surprised to see the Justice Department to move quickly to seek relief from the latest order.

“If we’ve learned anything the last year of litigation on high-profile...issues, it’s that these things get emergency appeals and they get stayed and they get stopped,” said Karen Tumlin, the legal director of the National Immigration Law Center. “It shouldn’t for one minute take the heat off Congress to pass that bill of love. Come tomorrow, we could be facing an emergency appeal at the Ninth Circuit….This stuff moves very fast in cases of national importance.”

Some immigrant rights' advocates went further, expressed concern Tuesday night that the judge's decision could lead to confusion and undercut the drive for a more durable legislative fix.

"To all of the dozens of DACA recipients messaging and texting me: yes, we agree entirely that this is more chaos and isn't going to be relief," Todd Schulte of FWD.us. wrote on Twitter. "Congress needs to act more now [than] ever, plain and simple. I'm sorry people are confused on what this means. DACA is gone."

Alsup's ruling came in connection with five lawsuits he is handling challenging the decision the administration announced in September to end the DACA program.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who filed one of the cases, welcomed the ruling and said he thinks it actually strengthens the position of lawmakers seeking to protect the so-called Dreamers in the face of pressure from Trump to offer concessions on funding for the border wall, limits on legal immigration and more.

"Why would anyone want to negotiate a bad deal to get DACA now that it’s become clear the court is saying the Trump administration may have tried to repeal the program in an unlawful way?" Becerra told POLITICO. "It's high time the Trump administration and stopped trying to load up the measure with all sorts of things that have nothing to do with the desperate plight Trump has put the Dreamers in."

Becerra also said he thinks the new ruling may help convince the Supreme Court that something was amiss in the way Trump officials analyzed DACA's legal viability.

"The record is becoming stronger that the basis for the Trump action is unsupported by the law," the California official said. "I have reason to believe we have a strong chance of having the preliminary injunction remain in place."

A spokeswoman for the University of California, which brought another of the suits ruled on Tuesday, also called for Congressional action.

"Unfortunately, even with this decision, fear and uncertainty persist for DACA recipients across California and the nation who want to continue to live, work, learn and contribute to the country they know as home," the spokeswoman said. "UC will continue to support DACA recipients by challenging the legality of the Trump administration’s rescission of DACA, supporting congressional legislation that would allow for permanent protection, and providing services and aid to its undocumented students."

Ted Hesson and Seung Min Kim contributed to this report.