DACA has been found illegal by a federal judge in Texas: NPR

DACA counted about 636,000 active recipients (known as DREAMers) at the end of last year.

The Washington Post via Callahan O’Hare / Getty Images

Hide captions

Switch captions

The Washington Post via Callahan O’Hare / Getty Images

DACA counted about 636,000 active recipients (known as DREAMers) at the end of last year.

The Washington Post via Callahan O’Hare / Getty Images

A judge in the Texas District Court ruled against a program of postponement of childhood arrival, damaging Obama’s policies that he had protected. is more than 800,000 Undocumented young immigrants From deportation after 2012.

The highly anticipated decision puts the fate of the beneficiaries of thousands of programs known as DREAMers into Congress. Biden administration And the Supreme Court, where conservatives make up the majority of 6-3.

Judge Andrew Hanen of the US District Court supported nine conservative-led states, including Texas, and prevented the Biden administration from accepting new DACA applicants. He said the program is not legal.

However, this ruling allows migrants currently protected by the program to maintain their status while the proceedings go through the appeal process.

The Biden administration has promised to protect DACA or introduce something similar.

“This review shows that the DACA program is ready to correct legal deficiencies, and along with government claims to correct it, a complete and immediate suspension of DACA does not provide fairness,” Hanen said. Wrote in the judgment.

DACA supporters are expected to appeal this decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Mexican-American Legal Defense Education Fund helped represent the 22 DACA recipients who acted as defendants in the case and wrote in March in preparation for such results. Note Such a ruling would not stop the program immediately.

“Even if the court invalidates the 2012 memo that established DACA, all parties to the proceedings said that DACA should continue in the near future while the court is considering appropriate remedies. I agree. “

Friday’s decision almost ensures that the issue will be resolved by either the US Supreme Court or Congress.

Save expertise in 2020

DACA Implementation In 2012, under the Obama administration.It enables without providing a way to citizenship Certain young immigrants A person who has lived and was illegally brought to the United States as a child to work for the two years subject to renewal.

To do TargetIndividuals must arrive in the United States before the age of 16 and have been resident in the United States since June 2007 and must be under the age of 30 at the time the program is implemented. They must be either current students, high school graduates, GED holders, or veterans of US military honorable discharge and cannot “threat the national security of public security.”

policy count At the end of last year, it had more than 636,000 active recipients and enjoyed considerable bipartisan support.Pew Research Center Survey found By 2020, 74% of Americans will support a law that gives immigrants who illegally come to the United States as children permanent legal status.

Roberto G. GonzalesA professor at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education, who has spent the last 20 years studying undocumented youth, said of NPR Code switch From access to healthcare to financial support for families and improved mental health, DACA’s quantifiable positive impact on recipients last June.

“The evidence is clear and indisputable,” he said. “DACA has had a tremendous impact on the lives of hundreds of thousands of young people over the last eight years.”

Nevertheless, the program has been at the heart of a protracted court battle since its inception.Former President Donald Trump, who said he would find a way to protect DREAMers without providing details, announced 2017 His administration will end the program and spark Task From US District Courts in several states and Washington, DC

The Supreme Court stood by DREAMers. Dominated the case In 2020, it blocked the Trump administration’s plans to dismantle the program for process-related reasons rather than substance.

Judge John Roberts expressed a majority in favor, saying that authorities have not provided detailed justification for revoking DACA, making their decision “arbitrary and capricious.” ..

“We do not decide if DACA or its withdrawal is a sound policy,” Roberts wrote. “The wisdom of these decisions is not our concern. We will only focus here on whether the Administration has complied with the procedural requirements of the law claiming” a rational explanation of its actions. ” ”

The court decision celebrate A short-term victory by DREAMers and immigrant advocates eases the imminent threat of deportation of thousands of people, but leaves the door open for the president to cancel the program through proper procedures.

Many Democrats at the state and federal levels have updated their demands for a permanent legislative solution, saying that then-presumed Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden would work to make DACA permanent if elected. Stated. As President, Biden has announced plans to protect DREAMers, but so far there seems to be insufficient support to pass in Congress.

Many were afraid that Trump would work well to dismantle DACA if re-elected.Legal experts generally agreed that there was not enough time left to do so for the rest of his term, but officials Efforts to roll back A program that refuses to accept new applicants and shortens the renewal permit from two years to one year even after the Supreme Court’s decision.

A federal judge overturned these restrictions in December 2020. order The terms of the program will be restored to what they were before the cancellation was attempted in 2017.

Texas lawsuit challenged the legality of the program

Meanwhile, a more direct challenge to DACA was ongoing in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas.

May 2018 — 6 years after creation — Texas and 6 Other states submitted Proceedings Disagree with the legality of the program itself.

The case is transfer To Andrew Hanen of the US District Court candidate President George W. Bush, well known for blocking two other Obama-era immigration initiatives 2015: Expanded DACA to more than 330,000 and attempted to provide similar protection to undocumented immigrant parents. (A 4-4 Supreme Court ruling in 2016 enabled the inferior court’s injunction.)

Ten states, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, asked Hanen In 2018 A provisional injunction that forces the government to refuse to renew DACA and stop accepting new applications.

Texas lawyers say the state has been damaged by resource depletion by DACA recipients, and immigrant advocates say DREAMer will bring DREAMer to the local economy by living, working, paying taxes and raising families in the United States. He argued that it was difficult to prove because he was contributing.

In the decision at the end of August, Mr. Hanen said that DACA Probably illegal That is because it exceeds the authority of the government. But he refused to issue a preliminary injunction, say it Plaintiffs disputed it in court and took too long to compare the situation to “returning toothpaste back into the tube” or descrambling the eggs.

“Here, the eggs are scrambled eggs,” Hanen wrote. “It makes no sense to try to bring it back to the shell, just by recording a preliminary injunction, and perhaps at great risk to many, and it does not serve the best interests of the country.”

About two years later, with the Supreme Court’s decision series In motions and debates in the Texas proceedings, Hanen instructed officials to bring their claims back in front of him.

so Hearing December 2020, state lawyer Insisted DACA violates the Constitution by circumventing Congressional powers on immigration law, and that is Should have been It was enacted by federal regulations, not a memorandum.

They also said the program increased state costs related to medical, educational and law enforcement, with Texas spending an estimated $ 250 million annually on social welfare DACA recipients.

Defendants — A group of DACA recipients represented by the Mexican-American Legal Defense Education Fund (MALDEF) and the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office — Insisted Obama has the authority to carry out the program and said the state has not shown any injuries due to DACA.

They added that a national injunction was inappropriate, as only Texas tried to prove harm based on the costs associated with the program. Defendants argued that the state was not in a position to challenge DACA and demanded that the proceedings be dismissed.

Both sides asked Hanen to settle the case without trial. He hadn’t ruled at the time.

Landscape changing in 2021

The court held another Hearing In late March, at that time, Hanen set a deadline in early April for both parties to provide more information. In Washington, DC, MALDEF has undergone many changes since the last court meeting. Note..

For one, there is a new resident of the Oval Office. On the day of the inauguration in January, President Biden Note Instruct DHS to take action to “preserve and enhance” DACA.

And just before the March hearing, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mallorcas Announcement In line with the President’s Memorandum of Understanding, government agencies issue “Notice of Draft Regulations”.

“This is an important step, but only passing the bill can give Dreamers, who know the United States as their hometown, a path to full protection and citizenship,” he said.

The House of Representatives has taken a step in this direction with the passage of the House of Representatives. American Dreams and Promises last month. The law, which also passed the House of Representatives in 2019, creates a process for DREAMer to obtain permanent residence and ultimate citizenship, and heads next to the Senate, whose fate is uncertain.

It has already received the support of Biden, who called it “an important first step in immigration reform.”

“US-based dreamers and TPS holders are part of our country’s organization and make important contributions to communities across the country every day,” he said. statement.. “Many have been at the forefront of this pandemic, striving to float, nourish and stay healthy in our country, but with fear and uncertainty due to their immigrant status. I am forced to live. ”

Immigration advocates prompt The Biden administration protects undocumented migrants by taking administrative action in the face of politically divided parliaments. For many, that would mean more than just maintaining DACA.

“DACA’s protection is not the upper limit of what the Biden Harris administration has to do, but the floor,” said Greisa Martinez Rosas, Executive Director of United We Dreams and recipient of DACA. last year..

Many have been after the Supreme Court ruling last year DREAMers Immigrant advocates told the NPR what they saw as a clear need for a more permanent solution.Theresa Lee, the inspiration behind the original DREAM Act He said that the more certainty of DREAMer, first introduced in 2001, could only come in the form of law.

“DACA is not the answer at all,” she said. Said.. “It was always vulnerable. It was a compromise, and DACA is by no means sufficient until there is real immigration reform for all 11 million undocumented people.”

DACA has been found illegal by a federal judge in Texas: NPR

Source link DACA has been found illegal by a federal judge in Texas: NPR

Back to top button