Slashdot Mirror


The Trump Administration Has Announced the End of DACA -- Unless Congress Can Act To Save It (recode.net)

The Trump administration said on Tuesday it plans to scrap a program that allows about 800,000 undocumented immigrants who came to the US as children to stay and work in the country, shrugging off criticism from within the president's own party and prominent business figures. From a report: The Trump administration is essentially leaving Congress a six-month window of time to try to save it. The legal shield is known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, and since its enactment in 2012, it has allowed roughly 800,000 undocumented young adults to live in the United States and obtain work authorizations every two years. [...] In practice, implementation is complicated. Those previously approved under DACA, with the permission to work in the United States, can continue to work without interruption until those approvals expire. And those who have already applied for protection or are seeking renewals will still have their applications considered by the U.S. government. For those whose permits are set to expire before March 5, 2018, though, the U.S. government will also allow them to renew their DACA status -- provided their applications are received before Oct. 5, 2017. Currently, there are about 201,000 young adults whose authorizations are set to expire this year, officials at the Department of Homeland Security explained Tuesday.

Tech giants like Apple, Facebook and Google are no doubt going to blast the Trump administration's decision: Last week, those executives joined more than 400 other business leaders in calling on the president to preserve DACA. Apple CEO Tim Cook, who previously (and privately) pressed Trump on the issue, said on Sunday that 250 of his "co-workers" would be affected by the change. Microsoft indicated that about 27 workers spanning fields like finance and sales would be hurt from Trump's move.
Zuckerberg said, "This is a sad day for our country. The decision to end DACA is not just wrong. It is particularly cruel to offer young people the American Dream, encourage them to come out of the shadows and trust our government, and then punish them for it."

7 of 817 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Which amendment ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Executive Branch is allowed to execute Congress's laws as they see fit. The Obama Administration gave guidance on how the deportation of undocumented immigrants was supposed to work. That's DACA. Completely constitutional.

    And remember, Obama was called the "Deporter In Chief" for how fervently he was deporting them... More than 2.5 million were removed. He was not soft on immigration.

  2. Re: Wrong (stereo)typing by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Funny how government control is bad when it's federal but it's just fine when the state does it.

    OF COURSE IT IS OK!!

    That's precisely how the US government was set up...that the majority of power was to reside within the States, with only a limited, fairly weak Federal Government.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  3. Re:Which amendment ? by RedK · · Score: 5, Informative

    The similar legislation, DAPA, that applied to parents, was overtuned and the same legal arguments could overturn DACA if it were ever challenged. 10 state AGs threatened to do just that if the White House did not act on DACA before September 5th.

    So it's not that it wasn't successfully challenged. It's that it was about to be and the precedents meant it didn't really stand a chance.

    --
    "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
    Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
  4. Re: "factual" by backslashdot · · Score: 5, Informative

    Uh those numbers have been flipped:

    In 1992 the number of murders was 23,760.
    In 2015 the number of murders was 15,696.

    The amount reduced!!
    Source: http://www.disastercenter.com/...

    Post a valid link, and assume people won't check it??

  5. Re:Global problem by arth1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I hope Trump gets rid of the Green Card Lottery. I don't understand why we give away 50000 green cards every year to people who may only have a high school degree.

    We're not "giving away" green cards. Green cards are not free. The fees are higher than many can afford, and is a source of income. The bare minimum fees are:

    - I-485 filing fee: $1,140
    - Biometric services fee: $85
    - Visum fee (to enter the US in the first place after "winning"): $160

    In addition, there are external costs:
    - Medical costs for filing a required I-693 form, in the $200-1,000 range depending on whether vaccinations are needed.
    - 10+ approved photos.
    - Costs of transportation to the US.
    - Transportation and accommodation for INS interviews.
    - Translation assistance or lawyers as needed.
    - Means of living for the couple of years it takes to process the application.

    So truly poor people can't afford to "win" a green card lottery.

  6. Re: Global problem by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Informative

    The "give money to Iran" incident was actually Iran's money that we had put a freeze on. One of the terms of the Iran deal was that we'd release that money if they hit some metrics. They hit the metric so we released the money. This wasn't just giving Iran US taxpayer money (like some try to describe it). It was us following through on a deal. Whether you like the Iran deal or not, once the deal is made you either need to follow through on it or it's worthless. We were following through on it by releasing funds that belonged to Iran but that we had frozen/seized.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  7. Re:Which amendment ? by mpercy · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not "as they see fit"...it's "he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed".

    Anyway, if DACA had only been "enforcement discretion" you'd have a point. The executive could choose to devote limited prosecutorial resources along lines that would leave undocumented kids alone.

    But DACA did a lot more than that. It provided work authorizations, travel authorizations (allowing illegal aliens to reenter the country), and created a self-funded agency without Congressional authorization (Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law").

    It was shot through with Constitutional problems. That DACA for Parents order was enjoined for just those reasons and the various States threatening to go to court over DACA would have based their arguments on the same reasons and likely would prevail on the same grounds.

    DACA as a program, had it been done as an act of Congress, would almost certainly be all the good things people want it to be. But as a whim of Obama's pen, it was always suspect and subject to being undone at the whim of some other President. Indeed, Obama is seeing all his legacy being unwound simply because he spent so much effort bypassing Congress that he built his house on sand.