Supporting Petition for DACA’s Effective Replacement
The petition’s signatories represent voters from 46 states. In support of our petition, we, the signatories, recognize the following facts:
- Those protected under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) are known as “Dreamers.” Have qualified for DACA, they must have been younger than 31 on 15 June 2012 (when the program began) and undocumented. They must have arrived in the US before turning 16 and lived there continuously since June 20071.
- Most DACA recipients arrives as toddlers. The median age of arrival for DACA recipients was six, and the most common age of arrival was three2. Thus Congressional inaction could rob recipients of the only community, identity, and home that they have ever known.
- 20% of DACA recipients enrolled in college3. At least two are third-year law students at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law.
- As of September 5, 2017, the Trump Administration announced its intention to begin phasing out the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, starting on March 5, 2018.
- As of November 8, 2017, Congress has 117 days to create legislation that (1) halts deportation for participants of this program, and (2) grants them an effective and efficient pathway to citizenship.
- After March 5, 2018, ICE will have the authority to deport more than 75% of DACA recipients, at a rate of roughly 7,000 individuals per week4.
- By 2020, all 728,285 DACA recipients will be subject to deportation, including the 24% who were eligible to renew by October 5.
- Our immigration laws have no mechanism to accommodate the special and unique circumstances of DACA recipients. Only Congress has plenary authority to determine DACA recipients’ fate5, and the Supreme Court has only engaged in questions of constitutional protection6 and access to public education for undocumented students7. The burden lies with Congress to avoid the short-term and long-term fallout of destroying DACA.
- The United States GDP will markedly suffer to the tune of about $460.3 billion over the course of the next decade if Congress fails to preserve DACA recipients’ integral role in our economy8. 97% of such recipients found employment or enrolled in college9, average hourly wages rose by 69%, and at least 72% of the top 25 Fortune 500 companies employed DACA recipients1 . If congress does not take swift action to protect these workers and scholars through a viable pathway to citizenship, our economy will noticeably suffer.
BASED ON THE FOREGOING, WE DEMAND CHANGE NOW.
PROTECT OUR DREAMERS.
ENACT A PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP.
1 Joanna Walters et al., What is Daca and Who are the Dreamers? The Guardian, (September 14, 2017, 11:30 AM), https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/04/donald-trump-what-is-daca-dreamers.
2 Tom K. Wong et al., Results from Tom K. Wong et al., 2017 National DACA Study, Center for American Progress 1, 13 (2017), https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/2017/08/27164928/Wong-Et-Al-New-DACASurvey-2017-Codebook.pdf.
3 Randy Capps et al., The Education and Work Profiles of the DACA Population, Migration Policy Institute, (August 2017).
4 Faye Hipsman et al., DACA at Four: Participation in the Deferred Action Program and Impacts on Recipients, 1, Migration Policy Inst. (2016).
5 Matthews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67 (1976).
6 See United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259, 260 (1990).
7 Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982).
8 Nicole Prchal Svajlenka et al., A New Threat to DACA Could Cost States Billions of Dollars, Center for American Progress (July 21, 2017, 10:05 AM), https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2017/07/21/436419/new-threat-daca-cost-states-billions-dollars/.
9 Tom K. Wong et al., DACA Recipients’ Economic and Educational Gains Continue to Grow, Center for American Progress (Aug. 28, 2017, 9:01 AM), https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2017/08/28/437956/daca-recipients-economiceducational-gains-continue-grow/.
This is a student organization website. Statements and views expressed here do not necessarily represent official views of Northwestern Pritzker School of Law