A Federal Judge in Texas is taking up a case to challenge the legality of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), for the second time. The case is being played between many Republican-led states, including Texas, against the United States Justice Department. 

The states suing for the end of DACA are Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas, and Mississippi.

DACA has been challenged since it has taken effect in 2012. The aim of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals is to protect immigrants who were brought here illegally when they were under 16 years old. Most DACA recipients were brought over with families when they were children. Today, many of them have been established in the workforce over a decade, served in the armed forces, and lived most of their life in the U.S.

DACA allows its recipients to receive work permits and travel permits and prevents them from getting deported provided they comply with their eligibility. DACA recipients are illegal immigrants who were brought to the US when they were younger than 16 yrs old. Recipients also had to be under the age of 31 when the law went into effect in 2012. They had to be in the country as well when the law went into effect. The other criteria of eligibility are that recipients have a high school diploma or GED, are honorably discharged from, or are serving in the military, or are enrolled in school. They cannot have committed crimes either.

There are currently over 580,000 DACA recipients across the United States. The average age of a DACA recipient is 28 years old and has been living in the US for around 22 years. Almost 1/3 of DACA recipients are in their late 30s and early 40s.

Lawyers representing DACA recipients asked that if the Federal Judge did decide to rule against DACA, he would not end the entire program. Rather, they asked that we would only remove the parts that are illegal. 

Those fighting to keep DACA in place claim it is within many federal statutes of immigration policy. 

The argument is that it is within the Executive Branch’s power to enforce immigration policy. One lawyer for the group fighting to keep DACA intact is that DACA allows for prosecutorial discretion not to pursue certain cases. In this instance, DACA simply means that the federal government will not pursue cases against children and teens under 16 who came here illegally.

The states that are suing the DACA program say that they are losing millions of dollars in healthcare and education. Thus, they assert they have a financial standing to sue for the end of DACA.

DACA recipients countered that argument stating at a rally outside of the courthouse that the states have not considered how much they pay in taxes and their contributions to society.

The states suing also believe DACA is taking powers away from Congress to decide how legal status is given, not the Executive branch. 

The same district judge who took up a case challenging the program in 2021 ruled that it violated the rule-making process that the Executive branch must follow when enacting programs. Yet, recently the Biden Administration took the DACA program through the formal rule-making process by allowing public input on the program.

This will probably be the first stepping stone for the legality of DACA to be debated in the Supreme Court.