What a Supreme Court Decision on Executive Action Could Mean for One Undocumented Immigrant

Today, in U.S. classrooms, you will find first, second, or third generation immigrant students. Most of these students are U.S. citizens.  However, among them, there exists an estimated 1.7 million undocumented young people under age 30 who are enrolled in high school, have graduated, obtained a GED, or are currently enrolled in elementary or middle school, according to the Pew Hispanic Center. Each year, about 65,000 undocumented students graduate from American high schools. As undocumented, they are without basic access to the numerous opportunities available to their documented or U.S. citizen counterparts and face significant barriers to higher education. Undocumented students cannot receive federal education benefits, and in some states, may be ineligible for in-state tuition. These barriers add to the social and economic challenges undocumented students already face as a result of their status.

Jong-Min’s Story

Like so many of these students who have aspirations of higher education, I too, came from abroad—Seoul, South Korea—and arrived in the U.S. in 1981 under a student visa. I was only a one-year old baby back then, and when my visa expired in 1985, I became undocumented at the age of 5. I’ve now lived in the U.S. for the last 35 years. I attended public schools, graduating from Stuyvesant High School in New York City in 1998, and later graduating magna cum laude in 2003 from University of Tennessee, Knoxville with a BA in Sociology with a concentration in Criminal Justice and a Minor in Psychology.

Thirteen years later, I am still stuck in my invisible prison behind invisible bars and with invisible chains. This is a prison where my lack of Social Security number prevents me from working, driving, voting, and accessing certain basic human rights, like health care. I am too old for the temporary reprieve from deportation under the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative, as I missed the cut off by a year. If I were a DACA recipient, I would be eligible for a work permit and temporary protection from removal. However, that obstacle has never deterred me, and even though it been many years since college, I still aspire to go to law school, and ultimately become a federal judge.

As the Supreme Court decides the fate of President Obama’s executive actions in United States v. Texas, which includes two deferred action initiatives – an expanded DACA and a proposed Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) initiative –  I, along with an estimated 290,000 persons eligible for expanded DACA and over 3.7 million persons eligible for DAPA, eagerly await their decision. In the absence of congressional reform, this is our hope along with our dream to contribute more fully to the country we have long called home.

Additional Resources 

•  U.S. Children of Undocumented Immigrants Set Up for Failure by Current Policies (American Immigration Council) – This blog demonstrates the profound impact of current immigration policies on pre-K-12 U.S. students.

• What the U.S. Supreme Court Case on Executive Action Means for Schools (American Immigration Council) – This blog details some of the implications of United States v. Texas on schools.

What the U.S. Supreme Court Case on Executive Action Means for Schools

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.