-
Original Date Announced
July 28, 2020DHS issues memo in response to Supreme Court's June 2020 decision. The memo, signed by Acting Secretary Wolf, rescinds the Nielsen and Duke memos, announces the agency's intent to reconsider the Napolitano memo, and adopts three changes to DACA pending reconsideration: (1) rejecting all new DACA applications; (2) prohibiting advance parole absent exceptional circumstances, and (3) limiting renewal period to one year.
[ID #998]
Reconsideration of the June 15, 2012 Memorandum Entitled “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children”Effective Date
July 28, 2020Subsequent Trump and Court Action(s)
-
August 28, 2020
New York v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-05228-NGG-JO (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 28, 2020)
The following states/DC filed an amended complaint in their DACA lawsuit, challenging Wolf's memo and its effects: New York, Massachusetts, Washington, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia.
View Document -
November 14, 2020
Vidal v. Wolf, No. 1:16-cv-04756-NGG-JO (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 28, 2020)
In Batalla-Vidal v. Wolf, No. 16-cv-4756, Make the Road New York filed an amended complaint challenging Wolf's memo and its effects. On November 14, 2020, the District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted plaintiffs' motion for class certification and held that Acting DHS Secretary Wolf was not lawfully serving under the Homeland Security Act (HSA) when he issued the revised DACA memo.
View Document
**Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.** -
December 4, 2020
Vidal v. Wolf, No. 1:16-cv-04756-NGG-VMS (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 4, 2020)
On December 4, 2020, the Eastern District of New York vacated the Wolf Memorandum. The court also ordered DHS to post a public notice within 3 calendar days that it is accepting first-time requests for consideration of deferred action under DACA, renewal requests, and advance parole requests according to the court's Order of November 14, 2020. DHS must also provide mailed notice to all class members and produce a status report.
View Document
**Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.** -
December 7, 2020
2020.12.07 USCIS Update Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
In response to the December 4, 2020 order issued in Batalla-Vidal v. Wolf, 16-cv-4756, USCIS announces that it will:
- Accept first-time requests for consideration of deferred action under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) based on the terms of the DACA policy in effect prior to September 5, 2017, and in accordance with the Court’s December 4, 2020 order;
- Accept DACA renewal requests based on the terms of the DACA policy in effect prior to September 5, 2017, and in accordance with the Court’s December 4, 2020 order;
- Accept applications for advance parole documents based on the terms of the DACA policy prior to September 5, 2017, and in accordance with the Court’s December 4, 2020 order;
- Extend one-year grants of deferred action under DACA to two years; and
- Extend one-year employment authorization documents under DACA to two years.
-
July 16, 2021
Texas v. Perez, No. 1:18-cv-00068 (S.D. Texas, July 16, 2021).
U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen found DACA to be "illegal," halting the processing of applications; however, he temporarily stayed his order of permanent injunction that would vacate protections for current DACA recipients. DACA was an improper exercise of agency authority, according to the court, because the normal “notice and comment” process for adopting new rules was not followed. The court orders USCIS to cease adjudicating new applications and granted summary judgment on plaintiffs’ Administrative Procedure Act (APA) claims. It vacated the June 15, 2012 DACA memorandum issued by former Secretary of Homeland Security Napolitano; remanded the memorandum to DHS for further consideration; and issued a permanent injunction prohibiting the government’s continued administration of DACA and the reimplementation of DACA without compliance with the APA. The Court, however, temporarily stayed its order vacating the DACA memorandum and its injunction for individuals who obtained DACA on or before July 16, 2021, including those with renewal requests.
**Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**
View Document -
October 6, 2022
State of Texas v. United States (5th Cir., October 6, 2022)
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld the 2021 district court ruling enjoining DACA and vacating the 2012 DHS memorandum establishing it. The Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court’s finding that the DACA program violated the Administrative Procedure Act both procedurally and substantively because the program did not go through notice-and-comment rulemaking and was, in the court’s view, inconsistent with the Immigration and Nationality Act.
However, the Fifth Circuit noted that the Biden Administration has recently promulgated a new DACA regulation, and therefore remanded the case to the District Court to consider the regulation's legality. In addition, the Fifth Circuit agreed to maintain the current stay that temporarily preserves the program for current DACA beneficiaries. The court ordered the stay to remain in effect pending further order from the Fifth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court.
**Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**
View Document -
September 13, 2023
2023.09.13 State of Texas et al. v. U.S. et al., case number 1:18-cv-00068 (S.D. Texas, 9/13/23)
U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ruled that the final Biden administration rule published in August 2022 is "not materially different" from the Obama administration policy that was also invalidated by federal courts. However, DHS is not currently required to "take any immigration, deportation, or criminal action against any DACA recipient, applicant, or any other individual that would not otherwise be taken."
The Biden administration rule will now be added to the 2021 injunction issued by Judge Hanen enjoining the Obama administration policy. Under the injunction, the current administration cannot approve new DACA applications but may consider renewal applications from current DACA beneficiaries.
**Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**
View Document -
January 17, 2025
2025.01.17 Texas v. Mayorkas, No. 23-40653, Fifth Circuit Opinion
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed in part and modified the district court's injunction in part, ruling that DACA is unlawful insofar as it extends benefits like work authorization but upholding DACA's protection from removal known as "forbearance." The court limited its ruling’s effect to Texas rather than applying a nationwide injunction and remanded for further proceedings.
The court concluded that, as opposed to the other suing states, Texas had demonstrated legal standing to challenge the Biden administration’s DACA rule, citing economic costs. However, the court allowed existing DACA recipients (whose initial deferred action was granted as of July 2021) to remain fully protected by staying the effect of its judgment "pending a further order of this court or the Supreme Court."
**Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**
View Document
Biden Administration Action: Revoked/Replaced
January 20, 2021Preserving and Fortifying Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)
President Biden issues a Day 1 Executive Order committing to "Preserving and Fortifying DACA. The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall take all actions he deems appropriate, consistent with applicable law, to preserve and fortify DACA."
View DocumentBiden Administration Action: Approved/Retained
July 19, 2021Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)
Reacting to Judge Hanen's decision, USCIS states that consistent with his order, "DHS will continue to accept the filing of both initial and renewal DACA requests, as well as accompanying requests for employment authorization. However, . . . DHS is prohibited from granting initial DACA requests and accompanying requests for employment authorization. Also consistent with that order, DHS will continue to grant or deny renewal DACA requests, according to existing policy."
View DocumentBiden Administration Action: Other
August 30, 20222022.08.30_DACA Rule
On August 30, 2022, the Biden administration published a final rule in the Federal Register that formalizes the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy as a federal regulation, replacing the Obama administration's 2012 memo.
The rule largely maintains the Obama-era eligibility requirements for DACA applicants and the process for obtaining work permits. Individuals who grew up in the U.S. but lack lawful status can apply to defer their removal for a renewable period of two years if they are over 15 years old, have lived in the U.S. since June 15, 2007, and were physically present in the country on June 15, 2012, as well as at the time of their application. The rule's effective date is October 31, 2022.
View DocumentCurrent Status
Not in effectMost Recent Action
August 30, 2022 Action: Other 2022.08.30_DACA RuleJanuary 20, 2021Acted on by Biden Administration
July 19, 2021Acted on by Biden Administration
August 30, 2022Acted on by Biden Administration
Original Trump Policy Status
Status: Final/Actual In LitigationTrump Administration Action: Agency DirectiveSubject Matter: DACAAssociated or Derivative Policies
- September 5, 2017 DHS terminates DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) Program
Pre Trump-Era Policies
-
June 15, 2012
Young noncitizens who meet certain criteria are declared low enforcement priorities and provided relief from removal.
2012 Napolitano Memo on DACA -
September 5, 2017
Executes a wind-down of DACA program (Acting DHS Secretary Duke).
DHS Memo: Memorandum on Rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) -
June 22, 2018
The Nielsen Memorandum upholds the Duke Memorandum from September 2017, which rescinded DACA. Secretary Nielsen provides 3 reasons: First, DACA is contrary to law under Texas v. United States and incompatible with the INA's regulatory scheme. Second, DHS is not sufficiently confident in the legality of DACA as a discretionary enforcement policy. Third, DACA was not implemented by Congress and lacks the detail and permanence of a statute. The Nielsen Memorandum also outlines guidance for individualized, case-by-case prosecutorial discretion.
DACA Memorandum from Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen -
August 1, 2020
Outlines changes to DACA program in light of Supreme Court ruling in June 2020.
NILC ILRC DACA FAQs
Documents
Trump-Era Policy Documents
-
New Policy
-
Prior Policy
-
Prior Policy
-
Prior Policy
-
Prior Policy
-
Subsequent Action
-
Subsequent Action
-
Subsequent Action
-
Subsequent Action
Original Source:
USCIS Update Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
-
Subsequent Action
Original Source:
Texas v. Perez, No. 1:18-cv-00068 (S.D. Texas, July 16, 2021).
-
Subsequent Action
Original Source:
Texas v. United States (5th Cir. Oct. 6, 2022)
-
Subsequent Action
Original Source:
DACA Decision 9/13/23
-
Subsequent Action
Original Source:
Texas v. Mayorkas, No. 23-40653, Fifth Circuit Opinion
-
Other
Biden Administration Policy Documents
To provide information, corrections, or feedback, please email IPTP.feedback@gmail.com
To provide information, corrections, or feedback, please email IPTP.feedback@gmail.com
Commentary
Explainer: Judge Hanen’s DACA Ruling
Go to articleDACA Program Found Unlawful in Ruling Applying Only to Texas
Go to article