Hundreds of people gather outside the U.S. Supreme Court to rally in support of the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals program. Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Supreme Court justices appeared divided on Tuesday over whether the Trump administration properly rescinded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, an Obama-era policy that allows unauthorized immigrants brought to the U.S. as children to remain and work in the country.

The big picture: Liberal justices questioned whether the administration clearly explained why it ended DACA — beyond claiming it to be illegal — and the impact of ending it. Conservative justices seemed skeptical about whether the courts have the authority to review the decision at all.

Why it matters: This is just the beginning. A decision is expected by the end of June, and it will affect hundreds of thousands of lives, American businesses and communities.

  • Meanwhile outside the courtroom, hundreds of protestors marched and chanted, "Home is here," holding signs that called for the protection of "Dreamers."

Inside, conservative justices questioned the challengers on why the Trump administration's decision to end DACA fell under judicial review.

  • Even if the court were to decide that the Trump administration ended DACA by wrongfully citing its illegality and by failing to adequately consider the broad consequences, Chief Justice John Roberts asked the challengers how much more reasoning and analysis the government would need to add.
  • And what would be the point in delaying the end of the program, justices asked, if the Trump administration can simply reword its rescission of DACA and go through with it anyway.

Liberal judges stressed the significant impact that ending DACA would have on individuals, businesses and communities. They questioned whether the government adequately accounted for the factors in its decision, as required, and took clear responsibility for the potential impacts.

And where is the political decision made clearly? That this is not about the law; this is about our choice to destroy lives.
— Justice Sonia Sotomayor to Solicitor General Noel Francisco
  • Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg was the first to question U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco, asking how the administration can say it is within agencies' discretion to end DACA — and that the courts cannot interfere — while also claiming the program was ended because it was found to be illegal.

What to watch: The Justice Department made clear they don't want the Supreme Court to rule on the legality of the DACA program, but instead on whether the administration followed the legally required steps and whether courts have the authority to intervene at all.

Between the lines: Supreme Court beat reporters from the New York Times and NBC News assess that based on their questions, the five conservative justices seem inclined to rule in favor of the Trump administration.

Go deeper: What's at stake as DACA reaches the Supreme Court

Go deeper

Updated 6 hours ago - Politics & Policy

Coronavirus dashboard

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

  1. Global: Total confirmed cases as of 9:45 p.m. ET: 19,282,972 — Total deaths: 718,851 — Total recoveries — 11,671,491Map.
  2. U.S.: Total confirmed cases as of 9:45 p.m. ET: 4,937,441 — Total deaths: 161,248 — Total recoveries: 1,623,870 — Total tests: 60,415,558Map.
  3. Politics: Trump says he's prepared to sign executive orders on coronavirus aid.
  4. Education: Cuomo says all New York schools can reopen for in-person learning.
  5. Public health: Surgeon general urges flu shots to prevent "double whammy" with coronavirus — Massachusetts pauses reopening after uptick in coronavirus cases.
  6. World: Africa records over 1 million coronavirus cases — Gates Foundation puts $150 million behind coronavirus vaccine production.

Warren and Clinton to speak on same night of Democratic convention

(Photos: Abdulhamid Hosbas/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images, Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton both are slated to speak on the Wednesday of the Democratic convention — Aug. 19 — four sources familiar with the planning told Axios.

Why it matters: That's the same night Joe Biden's running mate (to be revealed next week) will address the nation. Clinton and Warren represent two of the most influential wise-women of Democratic politics with the potential to turn out millions of establishment and progressive voters in November.

Trump considering order on pre-existing condition protections, which already exist

Photo: Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

President Trump announced on Friday he will pursue an executive order requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, something that is already law.

Why it matters: The Affordable Care Act already requires insurers to cover pre-existing conditions. The Trump administration is currently arguing in a case before the Supreme Court to strike down that very law — including its pre-existing condition protections.