DACA – to Be or not to Be
DACA – to Be or not to Be – that is the Question!
by José Enrique Perez
The saga of DACA continues. Trump said no more DACA. Then, many lawsuits were filed. Most courts have ruled that USCIS should continue accepting renewals. However, on April 24, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held that DHS’s decision to rescind DACA was “arbitrary and capricious” and vacated the termination of the program. The court held that its decision meant that DHS must accept and process new DACA applications, as well as renewal DACA applications – however, it stayed its order for 90 days to give the government a chance to respond.
The decision of the court differed from previous court rulings because it would affect new applications – i.e. initial applications from individuals who have never applied for DACA previously but who are eligible to apply. However, the court’s decision is on hold for 90 days. In the interim, the government has the chance to better explain its decision to rescind the program. That means that the court may reconsider its decision before the 90 days is over, and before its decision to allow new applications would go into effect.
As a result of the decision being on hold for 90 days, there are NO new changes to the program as of now. It is still being implemented on the terms of the prior court rulings.
So, in lay terms, what does it really mean? DACA is still good or not? Is it better now? To be or not to be? Yes, DACA is no longer dead. A federal court in Washington, DC that ruled that the Trump Administration ending of DACA was unlawful unless they came up with a better argument as to why they ended it. For the third time, a federal judge have reprimanded Trump Administration for ending DACA, and called the Administration out for how it ended it. Trump Administration has 90 days to explain to the court why it ended it and if the allegation is still the same, new applications will be accepted.
I did not want to end this article without writing about the new policies that the Trump administration has implemented that will undermine the independence of immigration judges and weaken due process in the immigration court system – including steps to impose numerical quotas on immigration judges and attempts to curtail procedural safeguards – threaten the integrity of the immigration courts. We will talk more about this in the next articles.
You should remember that this article is not intended to provide you with legal advice; it is intended only to provide guidance about the current immigration issues and other immigration policies.
I represent individuals in immigration cases. If you have any questions or concerns about an immigration case, you can call me at (315) 422-5673, send me a fax at (315) 466-5673, or e-mail me at email@example.com. The Law Office of Jose Perez is located at 120 East Washington Street, Suite 925, Syracuse, New York 13202. Now with offices in Buffalo and Rochester!!! Please look for my next article in the June edition.