The US Supreme Court will decide the legality of Donald Trump's so-called Muslim travel ban, which is widely seen as a test of his presidential powers.
A decision could take more than a year if the court takes up the case but declines to speed up resolution of it issuing a ruling in its current term.
DACA has protected about 800,000 people who were brought to the USA illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas.
But the Supreme Court dismissed those appeals in October after the second ban expired.
So far, the Supreme Court has leaned in favor of the administration. "We look forward to the Court hearing the case". Instead, the president's third proclamation, issued in September, denies entry indefinitely to most travelers from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen and North Korea as well as some government officials from Venezuela.
The current executive order is actually the third version of the ban after the first was dropped and replace by a second version in March past year.
Maria Sharapova progresses at Australian Open while Garbine Muguruza suffers shock defeat
She certainly handled the furnace-like conditions better than Muguruza, who needed treatment early on for her heat-blistered feet. Ninth-seeded Johanna Konta , the 2016 Australian Open semifinalist, went down to United States lucky loser Bernarda Pera 6-4 7-5.
Court challenges have seized upon Trump's repeated comments against Muslims, starting with his campaign vow to ban them from entering the country, to make the case that they were the intended target.
Trump's lawyers rely heavily on this clause and argue it gives the president almost unchecked power, especially during national emergencies, to screen out people from certain countries who he thinks might pose a threat to national security. Trump tweaked the order after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to reinstate the ban. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Trump violated immigration law. The Justice Department appealed to the 7th Circuit in a bid to reverse a lower-court ruling the policy. The justices did not explain their brief order. She suggested that it was by threatening to withhold grants and "conscripting" city police to enforce federal laws.
The "Constitution and Acts of Congress confer on the President broad authority to suspend or restrict the entry of aliens outside of the United States when he deems it in the Nation's interest", Solicitor General Noel Francisco argued in court papers.
The third version is permanent, unlike the other two, and the administration said it is the product of a thorough review by several agencies of how other countries' screen their own citizens and share information with the U.S.
In ruling against Trump on December 22, the 9th Circuit said the 1965 amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act "eliminates nationality-based discrimination" as a basis for denying immigration visas.