DACA Immigration Program Invalidated by Federal Judge
Judge blocked approval of new DACA applications, but postponed the effect of his ruling on current program recipients
A federal judge in Texas on Friday invalidated an Obama-era initiative that provided deportation protections and work permits to some young immigrants, a ruling that places the program in jeopardy.
U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ruled the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program was unlawful because Congress never gave the executive branch the power to grant mass reprieves to immigrants who are in the U.S. without authorization.
Judge Hanen’s ruling barred the Biden administration from approving new DACA applications, but the judge stayed the immediate effect of his ruling on current DACA recipients.
The program has offered temporary protections to any immigrants in the country without legal authorization who were 30 years old or younger when the program was announced. DACA recipients must have arrived in the U.S. by 2007, before they turned 16, and satisfied other conditions, including being a student or graduate and having no significant criminal record.
The Obama administration created the program to protect these young immigrants, often referred to as Dreamers, after their namesake bill the Dream Act—which would have provided them a path to citizenship—failed to pass Congress in 2010.
The ruling could create fresh urgency in Congress to find a permanent solution for the Dreamers, after bipartisan talks to strike a deal stalled this spring amid a continuing migration surge at the southern border. Lawmakers who support DACA have fretted over the idea of the program going before the current Supreme Court, which they believe would take a skeptical view of its legality.
Democrats announced this week they would attempt to create a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and other immigrants in the country illegally through their $3.5 trillion healthcare and antipoverty plan, which, if it satisfies certain procedural requirements, would need a simple majority to pass. But the strategy is no sure bet.
The Supreme Court last year, in a 5-4 decision, rejected the Trump administration’s attempt to cancel the program, saying it hadn’t offered adequate reasons for the move. The justices, however, didn’t rule on the legality of DACA itself, which has remained an open question in the years since President Obama first introduced it in 2012.
If DACA makes a return trip to the high court, the program would face a bench that has moved in a more conservative direction since it blocked the Trump cancellation, because of the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg last September. A leading member of the court’s liberal wing, Justice Ginsburg was in the 5-4 majority that saved the program. Three conservative justices in dissent— Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch —already said they believed DACA has been unlawful from the outset.
The fate of the Dreamers has become a flashpoint in the larger fight over immigration reform, and the continuing legal and political battles over DACA have created years of uncertainty for the more than 600,000 young immigrants who depend on the program.
Texas and other Republican-led states challenged the program in court, alleging it amounted to presidential overreach.
The states also say the program has cost them money, in the form of issuing driver’s licenses and other documents to DACA recipients.
The suit dates back to 2018. In earlier stages of the case, Judge Hanen had indicated that the Texas-led states were likely to win.
Judge Hanen had previously ruled in Texas’s favor in similar litigation challenging a broader Obama administration program known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans, which gave DACA-like protections to people in the country illegally with children who are U.S. citizens. That case ultimately reached the Supreme Court and, after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016, the justices deadlocked 4-4, effectively upholding Judge Hanen’s decision blocking the program.