The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Act, more commonly known as DACA, was introduced during the Obama administration to protect young undocumented immigrants that entered the U.S unlawfully with their parents. Often referred to as “Dreamers,” almost 800,000 of these young immigrants have lived in the United States since 2007. DACA provides temporary protection from deportation for two years, and it can be renewed for a fee of $495. DACA in its current form does not offer a path to citizenship, so Dreamers regularly renew their status.
Individuals that are eligible to apply for DACA must be under 31 years of age as of June 15, 2021; have been under the age of 16 when the individual came to the United States; continuously be in the United States from June 15, 2007; be in the United States without authorization; have not been convicted of a felony, and are currently in school or have obtained a GED.
DACA programs grant the status holder temporary protection from deportation for two years. They can apply for a driver’s license, the license however contains a mark to signify that this ID is not valid for federal purposes such as voting. DACA status holders can get a work permit, called an EAD permit, and unlike other work permits, this permit currency does not have a cap for individuals with DACA status. They pay state and federal income taxes. DACA status holders currently do not have a path to citizenship or permanent residency, cannot vote, and cannot receive federal benefits such as Social Security or food stamps.
DACA Policies in the Past
DACA is an executive order that was implemented by the Obama administration in 2012. Critics of the policy called it “a misuse of presidential power,” as they believed that the order overrode existing immigration law. The Obama Administration then planned to expand the executive order to try to create Deferred Action for Parents of U.S Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) but their actions were halted due to lawsuits from states including Texas. The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Texas was split and the expansion was halted. The Court did not rehear the case and lower courts sided with Texas, agreeing that the expansion overrode immigration laws that were already in place.
In 2017 the Trump Administration intended to phase out the DACA program over a six-month period, when the Justice Department would no longer accept renewal or new applications. However, three U.S district courts from California, New York, and the District of Columbia filed an injunction to halt the plan, based on the belief that terminating DACA was arbitrary and capricious. The Supreme Court sided with the states, ruling that the DACA program was able to stay due to the way the Trump administration had tried to end the program, but did not focus on the merit or the constitutionality of the program.
The Biden Administration on DACA
Within the first 100 days in office, the Biden Administration signed an executive order to preserve DACA. The executive order stated that DACA recipients are protected from deportation and will remain eligible for work permits.
The Biden Administration is also assigning more immigration officers to review the backlog of DACA applicants. 81,000 first-time DACA applications and 13,000 DACA renewal requests were filed following the executive order. As of June 2021, more than 33,000 first-time applicants had completed their biometrics and 11,000 applicants have already had appointments. More than 37,000 individuals were waiting to receive an appointment date.
On January 20, 2021, the Biden administration announced the U.S Citizenship Act of 2021. The act would make 11 million undocumented individuals eligible for various legalization programs to lawfully reside in the U.S. It includes a pathway to lawful permanent residence for DACA recipients. If passed, the act would enable DACA recipients to apply for an adjustment of legal status.
Arguments in Favor of Biden’s DACA Policy
Some praise DACA and Biden’s efforts to protect the policy, claiming that it protects young individuals and allows them to pursue their educational and professional career goals. Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, supports the policy because it gives young people the autonomy to make decisions regarding their education and involvement with serving in the military. A study conducted by Dartmouth University found that enacting DACA improved the attendance and graduation rates of undocumented youth by 40%. In addition, the study found that approximately 49,000 additional undocumented youth received a high school diploma due to DACA’s passage. Overall, DACA has shown to have a positive impact on educational outcomes among undocumented youth.
A study by the American Action Forum looks at the impact that DACA recipients have on the United States economy. The study found that DACA recipients make positive economic contributions through their presence in the workforce. Over 380,000 DACA recipients are employed. 23% of all DACA workers are employed in the arts and food service industry, contributing an estimated 4 million dollars annually to the United States GDP. In total, employed DACA recipients contribute $41.7 billion annually to the United States GDP.
Arguments Against
Critics of DACA claim that expanding the program to include a pathway to lawful permanent residency rewards illegal immigrants. The Heritage Foundation, for example, thinks that the U.S should focus on immigration laws that prioritize Americans without risking the U.S’s national and economic security. They think that DACA and a possible expansion will result in higher rates of illegal immigration and diminish security at U.S borders which would affect American taxpayers negatively. For instance, the Heritage Foundation believes that undocumented immigrants are costing American taxpayers money through their use of public services such as the fire department, police department, highways, and parks.
Critics also claim that if DACA recipients receive amnesty from the Biden administration, they will take employment opportunities away from native born U.S residents. A study by the General Accounting Office has shown that the large number of immigrant workforces would depress wages, or lower the wages for U.S-born workers. George J. Boras from Politico states in his article that wage trends have shown that a 10% increase in the number of workers for a certain job area will result in a wage decrease of 3%.
