On April 18, the eight sitting justices on the U.S. Supreme
Court will
consider United States v. Texas, a politically charged lawsuit about the
legality of some of President Barack Obama’s executive actions on immigration.
The initiatives in dispute—expanded Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful
Permanent Residents (DAPA)—have been on hold since a district court in Texas
issued a preliminary injunction (a temporary block) in the case in February
2015. A Supreme Court decision in favor of the United States could clear the
way for the initiatives to go forward as early as June 2016. A decision against
the United States, or a 4-4 split decision would affirm the lower court’s
ruling and uphold the block on expanded DACA and DAPA.
Both DACA and DAPA are deferred action initiatives. To qualify to stay in this country,
individuals must have lived here five years, register with the government, pay
taxes, and pass a criminal background check. A grant of deferred action does
not confer any type of lawful immigration status, enforceable legal rights, or
an ability to remain permanently in the United States. Nonetheless, it allows
families to remain together and to apply for work authorization.
Expanded DACA and DAPA have the potential to affect a
substantial number of American families.
The
Migration Policy Institute (MPI) estimates that 3.7
million undocumented immigrants could qualify for protection from removal
under the two initiatives. Additionally,
86
percent of children of undocumented parents, or 4.4 million, have parents
that would qualify for DAPA. Many of these children are U.S. citizens.
There are also, however, educational and socio-emotional
health benefits. For example, as of December 31, 2015, over
700,000 young people have received the 2012 version of DACA (not challenged
in the lawsuit), broadening their
educational opportunities. Many recipients now have access to
public universities, trade schools, and additional scholarship opportunities.
Many educational groups and
advocates, including the American Federation of Teachers and the National
Education Association, have stated in a friend-of-the-court brief filed on the
Obama administration’s side, that "DACA is unique among immigration policies because it
makes educational attainment a condition for eligibility." They highlight that in order
to be eligible for DACA, an individual must be “either in school, have
graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained
a general education development (GED) certificate, or are honorably discharged
veterans of the U.S. Coast Guard or the U.S. Armed Forces.”
Additionally, they note that the DAPA program would extend
significant stress relief to families with school-aged children. Not
surprisingly, removing the threat of a parent’s deportation and the ability to
improve economic prospects via work authorization may mitigate some of the
statistically profound
disadvantages facing children with at least one undocumented parent.
Executive
Action Resources
- Defending DAPA and Expanded DACA Before the Supreme Court (American Immigration Council) – This guide provides brief answers to common questions about United States v. Texas, including what is at stake in the case, how the litigation began, what the contested issues are, and the impact the case may have on our country.
- Shield From Deportation Threat to Get Day at High Court (Education Week) – This article details some of the implications of United States v. Texas on schools.
Lesson Plans
- Just What is Executive Action? A Lesson from the Principal’s Desk Students apply inductive reasoning skills about individual school policies set by the principal in order to understand what execution action is and what its limitations are.
- Writing a Way In: Multiple Perspectives on Executive Action Students write their way into understanding the multiple perspectives that surround this immigration issue after reading reactions in favor and against the expanded DACA and DAPA initiatives.
