This resource summarizes the ruling in State of Texas, et al., v. The United States of America, et al., and clarifies what the decision and permanent injunction mean for current and past DACA recipients as well as those eligible for DACA who had not yet filed initial applications, or had a pending initial application, as of July 16, 2021.

The Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, has released a long-awaited final rule codifying Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. The new regulations, which will take effect on Oct.

Are clients asking about the latest news regarding DACA or whether there are any changes on the horizon that would permit U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, to resume approving first-time applications?

Given the uncertain future of the DACA program, it’s critical to screen recipients for all other forms of immigration relief. Is the client potentially eligible for a more permanent immigration benefit, either affirmatively or defensively if in removal proceedings? Even if a client was thoroughly screened prior to applying for DACA initially, changes in personal circumstances or immigration policy may mean that a new form of relief is now available. This advisory reviews some of the most common forms of relief that may apply to DACA recipients.

In Chavez Gonzalez v. Garland, 16 F.4th 131 (4th Cir. Oct. 20, 2021), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit abrogated a 2018 decision issued by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions that had restricted immigration judges’ authority to terminate removal proceedings. In light of the Chavez Gonzalez decision, immigration judges located within the Fourth Circuit now have authority to terminate removal proceedings of noncitizens when they deem it appropriate, for example, in cases of DACA recipients like Mr. Chavez Gonzalez. Advocates hope that Attorney General Garland will act to overrule the 2018 decision nationwide, as he has done with other harmful Trump-era attorney general decisions.

The Department of Homeland Security published its long-awaited proposed rule on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program on Sept. 28, 2021. This article briefly summarizes the proposed rule and includes a link to submit a comment on the rule before the Nov. 29, 2021, deadline.

The Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, published proposed regulations regarding Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, on Sept. 28, 2021.

A permanent injunction has blocked U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services from approving initial Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals applications as of July 16, 2021. The order, issued by a federal judge, allows current DACA recipients to keep their deferred action and associated employment authorization. USCIS will continue to adjudicate applications for DACA renewal, work authorization and advance parole, for current DACA recipients and those who apply for renewal within one year of their most recent DACA expiration.

On July 16, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in State of Texas, et al., v. The United State of America, et al. ruled that DACA is unlawful and vacated the June 15, 2012, memorandum that created DACA. The court’s Memorandum and Order is found here.

On July 16, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in State of Texas, et al., v. The United State of America, et al. ruled that DACA is unlawful and granted Texas’ request for permanent injunction. The court’s Order of Permanent Injunction is found here.

On Jan. 20, 2021, President Biden introduced a memo focusing on the preservation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program. The DACA program allows certain undocumented individuals who entered the United States as children to be safe from removal for a period of up to two years if they meet certain eligibility requirements

These FAQs answer common practitioner questions regarding advance parole for DACA recipients.

Use this tool to help organize evidence, determine whether there are gaps that must be addressed and generate ideas for gathering evidence in hard to document cases.

Points on program management on the impending decision from SCOTUS on DACA.

This screening tool can be used to assess DACA eligibility for first-time applicants. This screening tool can be used to assess DACA eligibility for first-time applicants.

Use the supporting evidence checklist to ensure you are submitting a complete initial DACA application.

This digest tracks DACA developments in reverse chronological order. This resource will be updated regularly.

The Biden campaign listed a number of immigration-related priorities that his presidency would tackle if elected. Most of these could be accomplished through executive orders, regulations, or changes to policies and procedures rather than requiring legislation.

For immigration advocates, one of the most consequential issues that will likely be decided by the presidential election is the future of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. On June 18, 2020, the Supreme Court held in DHS v. Regents of the University of California that the manner in which the Trump administration had attempted to end DACA was not lawful.

On June 18, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. Regents of the Univ. of California, 140 S. Ct. 1891 (2020) holding that the Trump administration’s effort to end DACA had not complied with the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act. As a result, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling issuing an injunction against the DACA rescission and remanding the case for further proceedings.

In July 2020, the CLINIC-led Temporary Protected Status Advocacy Working Group released a report estimates that the next administration could protect upwards of 3.5 million people through these executive actions.

The Supreme Court decision on June 18, 2020, in Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. Regents of the Univ. of California has given DACA recipients a reprieve from the Trump Administration’s efforts to end the program. Nonetheless, until Congress acts to provide permanent status for those with DACA, it is important for practitioners representing DACA recipients to consider permanent relief options in each DACA client’s case.

The Supreme Court decision on June 18, 2020, in Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. Regents of the Univ. of California has given DACA recipients a reprieve from the Trump Administration’s efforts to end the program. Nonetheless, until Congress acts to provide permanent status for those with DACA, it is important for practitioners representing DACA recipients to consider permanent relief options in each DACA client’s case.

155 organizations call on the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to immediately reinstate DACA as implemented in 2012 and work with the Senate to immediately pass the American Dream and Promise Act

CLINIC joined the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and other Christian organizations in an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court urging the Court to not allow the administration to rescind DACA. The brief focuses on the arbitrariness of the decision to rescind DACA as well as the catastrophic effect the rescission will have on families.

Update: On June 28, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review three of the below legal challenges - Regents of the University of California v. DHS, Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen, and NAACP v. Trump. Oral arguments are scheduled for November 12, 2019.

Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher, LLP, represented CLINIC on an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs-appellees in Inland Empire – Immigrant Youth Collective, et al., v. Kirstjen Nielsen, et al. The plaintiffs-appellees challenge the government’s unlawful termination of their DACA without process on behalf of a class of DACA recipients.

Following the administration’s September 5, 2017 termination of DACA, a number of legal challenges were filed. In January and February of 2018, federal courts in California and New York issued nationwide preliminary injunctions ordering the government to continue to accept renewal requests from anyone who has previously held DACA.  In compliance with these injunctions, USCIS continues to accept and process DACA renewal requests from individuals who have been granted DACA in the past.

CLINIC has joined with Muslim Advocates and other faith partners as Amici Curiae, or friends of the court, in the Texas. v. Nielsen case challenging the constitutionality of the DACA program. The brief asks the court to deny Texas’s motion for preliminary injunction which would halt adjudication of all DACA cases. The case is scheduled to be heard in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas on August 8, 2018.

Learn about screening DACA recipients for Special Immigration Juvenile Status eligibility.

This bilingual (English/Spanish) screening tool can help legal services  providers assess whether a DACA recipient is eligible to request renewal.

Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc., Catholic Charities USA and the USCCB’s Migration and Refugee Services joined to urge DHS Acting Secretary Elaine Duke to extend the Oct. 5, 2017 deadline set by the administration for certain renewals. The letter was sent following the administration’s announcement to phase out DACA and providing a narrow window for certain DACA recipients (those with DACA valid until March 5, 2018) to file for renewal by Oct. 5, 2017 and subsequent hurricanes that have ravaged eastern Texas, Florida and other southeastern states.

Use this flow chart as a quick guide to understand what to do next as a DACA recipient. Available in English and Spanish.

This tool will help immigrant legal service providers and community-based organizations plan to effectively and efficiently respond to DACA termination.

Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc., Catholic Charities USA and the USCCB’s Committee on Migration joined to urge the president to continue DACA, a policy protecting nearly 800,000 young people. The letter was sent amid reports that the administration may soon end the policy that provides protection from deportation and work authorization to young people who were brought to the U.S. as children.

Recent guidance from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services indicates that the agency is no longer placing a hold on the adjudication of applications for adjustment of status filed by recipients of Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, in the jurisdictions of the Sixth and Ninth Circuits. This updated guidance comes in light of those federal appellate courts’ decisions in Flores v. USCIS, 718 F.3d 548 (6th Cir. 2013) and Ramirez v. Brown, 852 F.3d 954 (9th Cir. 2017). 

DACA is an executive action, implemented by President Obama in 2012, providing deportation relief and the opportunity to work for a select group of young, undocumented people living in the United States. This document provides some talking points.