Harris to meet with DACA recipients after federal court ruling

Vice President Kamala Harris on Thursday will meet with recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and immigrant advocates as the White House urges Congress to move quickly on immigration reform — potentially in a budget reconciliation bill Democrats hope to vote on this year.

Harris will meet with 11 DACA recipients, current applicants for the program and immigrant rights leaders, a senior White House official told POLITICO. The meeting comes after a federal judge in Texas on Friday ruled that DACA is unlawful and blocked the Biden administration from approving new applications for the Obama-era program, intensifying the sense of urgency among Democrats, immigrant advocates and other DACA supporters.

“The president and her are fighting for them. That’s the topline message,” a senior White House official said. “But they, above all, need Congress to create a pathway to citizenship and that has to happen as soon as possible, which is why they've called for this to happen through reconciliation or other means.”

On Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen ruled that the Department of Homeland Security can no longer approve new DACA applicants, but can continue to process DACA renewals as the issue continues to move through the courts.

The ruling was the latest blow to the program, which has granted work permits and protection from deportation to more than 600,000 undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children. DACA recipients, immigrant advocates and attorneys for months had been bracing for Hanen to rule against the program, urging Congress to move quickly with immigration reform.

The court decision, the senior official said, has “only made the issue more important.”

Democrats are planning to include immigration measures — such as a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, Temporary Protected Status recipients and essential workers, like farmworkers — in the forthcoming $3.5 trillion spending bill. As bipartisan talks on Capitol Hill have stalled, the reconciliation package may be the only opportunity Biden has to secure a pathway to citizenship without GOP support. Still, it is unclear if the measures will survive the Senate’s budget rules that would allow it to be part of the final package.

Meanwhile, the Justice Department plans to appeal the Texas federal judge's decision and the Department of Homeland Security will issue a proposed rule meant to safeguard DACA “in the near future,” Biden said in a statement Saturday. He added, however, that only “Congress can ensure a permanent solution” by offering Dreamers a pathway to citizenship.

“They’re exploring all sorts of options,” the official said. “But, to be very clear, they know that the way to get to certainty is their shared belief that Congress needs to create a legal pathway to citizenship.”

Last month, Harris met with a group of immigrant women, including DACA and Temporary Protected Status recipients and green card holders, on the ninth anniversary of the DACA program’s creation. In May, Biden met with a group of six DACA recipients to highlight immigration reform as one of his administration’s top priorities.




https://www.politico.com/news/2021/0...ipients-500463

Joey will likely reissue DACA 2.0 EO following APA guidelines.

No, Hanen ruled in two parts, one was that DACA did not follow APA, and the other is that even if DACA followed APA, Obama had no authority to issue benefits.

What's there to meet about?
Harris: How can the admin help you?
DACAer: Legalize us.
Harris: On it. Ok. Great meeting.


How exactly is the Biden admin going to strengthen and shield DACA like they say they will?

there she is!!! KaMAGA from downtown!!!

Lawfare Blog wrote an analysis of the ruling and the options the administration has in terms of fortifying the program. The issue is that the entire process could take up to 2 years, which I believe is why they began considering reconciliation in the first place.

In its rulemaking, according to Hanen, the government could consider the economic benefits that DACA conferred on U.S. citizens, entities and institutions, including institutions of higher learning, corporations and the U.S. military—benefits that Roberts had earlier cited in Regents. The government would also do well to consider the diplomatic and foreign policy consequences of revoking DACA's benefits. For example, ending the program might lead other countries whose nationals were affected to put diplomatic pressure on the United States. The disruptions caused in other countries by the need to absorb hundreds of thousands of young people with minimal ties to those countries could strain U.S. foreign policy. In addition, if the U.S. government used prosecutorial discretion to decline to remove current DACA recipients, the presence of a substantial group of persons within the country whom the government chose not to remove could be problematic for both that group and U.S. persons and entities with relationships with that group. As the Supreme Court noted in Plyler v. Doe, lingering presence in the United States without the ability to gain an education or earn a livelihood could create social and economic problems that executive action can resolve. The claim for executive discretion is all the more compelling in addressing the plight of persons like the DACA recipients who—as minors—lacked a voice in their parents' initial decision to enter the United States.

In conjunction with its rulemaking, the government may choose to appeal Hanen's ruling, as President Biden has vowed to do. However, courts further up the ladder, including ultimately the Supreme Court, may choose to leave Hanen's decision and remedies in place until the government's rulemaking on DACA is final. That process—which under the Administrative Procedure Act would include notice of a proposed rule, comments by interested parties, and issuance of a final rule—could take up to two years to complete. In the meantime, unless Congress acts to codify DACA's benefits, recipients will be uncertain about their future.

^Wonderful. More uncertainty.

I read somewhere else that APA could take 2 years, and I wasn't sure if that was correct, so glad to see that confirmed here.

Please tell me they’re not UWD DACA recipients.

This is theater. Harris knows exactly what DACA people want. Her time is better spent talking with senators, especially republican ones.

I'm curious what democrats think about border security and what their plans are. If their plan is to take any action on the border (more funding to DHS and/or more funding for the State Department to address the core reason why there's a larger flow of people coming in) they should propose that to republican senators and could sway a few of them. They need to do it now. If their action is to do nothing, I'd be surprised because immigration is the issue that's polling the lowest for democrats.