DACA Recipients In Limbo as Trump Releases List of Demands
A month ago, President Donald Trump rescinded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, once more hanging the threat of deportation over the heads of some 800,000 young immigrants.
October 19, 2017 at 03:39 PM
5 minute read
A month ago, President Donald Trump rescinded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, once more hanging the threat of deportation over the heads of some 800,000 young immigrants. Enacted by President Barack Obama in 2012, DACA gave temporary deportation reprieve and work authorization to young people brought to the United States as children who have grown up here and have no other clear path to legal status under current law.
Just a few days after issuing the six-month phase out of the program, Trump said he was close to a deal with Democrats on DACA, professing his “great love” for the program's recipients. In a Sept. 5 tweet and a subsequent conversation with Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford, Trump suggested that he might be willing to extend the March 5 deadline to allow lawmakers to find a solution, but did not say how long that extension would be. Then, on Oct. 8, the Trump administration released a list of demands that any potential legislation would need to meet in order to reach a deal that would continue to protect individuals currently covered by DACA from deportation. The list includes cutbacks in legal immigration and, according to a White House aide, a path to citizenship is not on the table.
Currently, Congressional Democrats, with some bipartisan support, have pinned their hopes to the DREAM Act—a piece of legislation first introduced in 2001 that would provide permanent legal status to about 1.6 million 'Dreamers,' as they have come to be known. The bill has been reintroduced several times since it was initially proposed, but has failed to make it out of Congress and currently lacks the GOP support needed to put the bill to a vote. Lankford co-authored a conservative version of the DREAM Act, called the SUCCEED Act, which would instead offer conditional permanent resident (CPR) status to Dreamers through multiple, merit-based steps. These merits would include being employed, pursuing higher education or serving in the military. The CPR would only last five years, but could be renewed for another five. Individuals could lose their status by committing a felony or serious misdemeanor, and after 10 years, a Dreamer could then apply for lawful permanent resident status—known colloquially as a green card.
As with many of the public statements that Trump has made since beginning his campaign for presidency, there is a stark contrast between his current and past stance on DACA. In 2012, for example, he spoke to CNBC saying, “You have people in this country for 20 years, they've done a great job. They've gone to school, they got great marks, now we're supposed to send them out of the country? I don't believe in that.” On the campaign trail, he expressed an opposite view, claiming that he would “immediately terminate President Obama's illegal executive order on immigration.” Then, at a February 2017 press conference held soon after he took office, Trump said, “We are going to deal with DACA with heart,” noting that the issue was difficult for him because, “I love these kids.”
The consequences of revoking the protections granted by DACA extend beyond the turmoil into which so many individuals' lives would be thrown. Data from a 2017 study sponsored by the Center for American Progress indicates that approximately 97 percent of DACA recipients are currently employed or enrolled in school. The progressive public policy research and advocacy organization estimates that ending DACA would deprive the United States of more than $460 billion in economic growth over the next decade. Clearly, as Trump himself has acknowledged, the vast majority of DACA recipients are using the program to attain an education and establish lives as thriving contributors to the economy and society. The United States would suffer an equal parts deficit in tax revenue and talent should the hundreds of thousands of young people who have been given a chance to secure their standing as Americans under DACA be forced to return to countries they never really called home. Despite vocal objections from the public and prominent figures in business and politics alike, the Trump administration appears intent on using DACA protections as a bargaining chip, no matter how high the stakes.
The deadline for DACA recipients to renew applications that are set to expire before March 5 passed on Oct. 5. Any recipient whose status expires after March 5 is in immigration limbo, as Trump has put the onus on Congress to come up with a solution. With his administration's recently released list of hard-line demands, Trump is essentially holding the kids he professed to love hostage. A deal seems unlikely, as the demands include cuts to legal immigration, cracking down on sanctuary cities and money to fund the border wall.
Lisa T. Felix, of Klasko Immigration Law Partners, advises employers on immigration compliance, responding to government investigations, and immigration strategy and planning. Steven R. Miller is a technical writer at the firm.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDon’t Settle for the Minimum: Finding Constitutional Claims Closer to Home
7 minute readSeven Rules of the Road for Managing Referrals To/From Other Attorneys, Part 1
7 minute readNew Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
6 minute readThe Moving Goalposts of Overtime Exemption: Texas Judge Invalidates 2024 Salary Threshold Rule
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250