A federal judge will decide whether to resume the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program, which provides temporary deportation protection and work permits to certain undocumented immigrants, after the U.S. government proposed a new plan on Sept. 29. However, Texas residents would not receive work permits.
According to the proposed plan, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services could accept DACA applications from people who live in all states. The program provides deportation protection and work authorization to people who entered the U.S. before they were 16, have resided in the U.S. since June 2007 and were under the age of 31 in June 2012, according to the agency’s website. It has not accepted applications since July 2021 due to a court ruling.
“The reason that we have DACA to begin with is because these young folks didn’t have an option,” said Krystal Gómez, a managing attorney at the Texas Immigration Law Council. “There was nothing to protect them, to make sure they could continue their studies so they could work lawfully.”
Under the proposed plan, all DACA recipients would continue to receive protection from deportation, and the change would apply to new applicants as well as current recipients who apply for renewal.
However, the plan would designate people who live in Texas as ineligible for “DACA-related benefits,” such as employment authorization, which means they would not be able to work in the state. Texas has led an ongoing legal dispute against the federal government over the legality of DACA since 2018.
In July 2021, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen found DACA unlawful and prevented the federal government from approving any new applications to DACA. However, his ruling was stayed so that current DACA recipients could continue to renew their benefits, Gómez said.
The federal government appealed Judge Hanen’s ruling to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Texas was the only state to allege damages as a result of DACA, such as increased healthcare and education costs, Gómez said.
The court upheld Judge Hanen’s ruling, but since Texas was the only state to claim any damages, the ruling’s application was limited to the state and handed back to Judge Hanen, who tasked the federal government with creating a new plan.
“It was just like a one-sided allegation that DACA students cost the state of Texas money,” Gómez said. “The 5th Circuit basically said, ‘Okay, fine. Since Texas is the only party that showed any kind of damage, we’re limiting this to Texas.’”
An agency spokesperson wrote in an email the agency does not comment on pending litigation.
“(They) did not take into account all the money that these students bring in and how much they contribute to the workforce,” Gómez said. “It was a one-sided allegation that DACA students cost the state of Texas money.”
The organization 725 Dream provides legal help and education for aspiring U.S. citizens. Its name comes from the old price for citizenship applications, $725, said Dante Conde, assistant director of community outreach. Conde, who is also a Plan II and rhetoric and writing junior, said the organization has a local UT chapter, and he works with a “sizable amount” of DACA students.
“A lot of them are struggling financially, not only because of tuition and housing, but because (of) how much the DACA (or citizenship) applications and extra legal fees cost,” Conde said.
For some of 725 Dream’s clients, Conde said these changes would be a roadblock and create a financial burden, as many applicants cannot afford to apply to DACA or to become a citizen without a job or work permit. He said he has family members who are immigrants and DACA recipients who have had to drop out of school and try to find a job because they had no work permit.
“Revoking a (work permit makes) it harder for them to not only live financially, but be able to complete their application financially,” Conde said. “It puts them in a very hard spot.”
