The Law Office of Ryan M. Gibson Uncategorized What is the Difference between DAPA, DACA and an expanded DACA?

What is the Difference between DAPA, DACA and an expanded DACA?

border patrol

Current Status of DACA, expanded DACA and DAPA.

President Obama’s effort to make reasonable changes in immigration policies (DAPA and an expanded DACA) has bumped up against a serious road block, at least for the time being. Unfortunately,for millions of people residing in the United States the ruling in U.S. v. Texas has been affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in 4-4 decision. A decision that consisted only, as the NY times pointed out, nine words. “The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court.” However it establishes no precedent and was without any reasoning. There is hope for a case coming back in the future.

This decision has effectively , at least for the time being, crushed the hopes of deportation relief  of approximately 11 million unauthorized immigrants. The president’s program would have at least temporarily helped 3 major categories of people living in the United States , not to mention their families and friends. DAPA and the proposed expanded DACA will have to live to fight another day.

Below is a short summary people who could have benefited directly from President Obama’s Administration plan but NOW WILL NOT.

  • DAPA – DAPA refers to a program to help the Parents of U.S. citizen children or U.S. permanent resident children. This seems like an entirely reasonable idea to help keep families together and also benefits U.S. citizens by being able to maintain close ties to their mothers and fathers.
  • DACA- The original DACA is still valid but the new plan would have increased the period of deportation deferral to three years instead of two years.
  • Ruling invalidated the new proposed expanded form of DACA which was to include unauthorized immigrants who entered the United States before January 2010, from the current cutoff of June 15, 2007. The expansion also eliminated the requirement that applicants be younger than 31 years old.

The above changes were reasonable and sensible. They aimed to treat people we live and work with more humanely and with more dignity. Unfortunately, this time around these efforts have beend thwarted. It is my hope more and more people will see the “light” and start treating our fellow man with more compassion and respect. Our immigration laws are tough and draconian enough and we do not need to simply reject reasonable modifications under the guise that the President is overreaching his executive authority. Please check out the NY Times article which does an excellent job of explaining U.S. v Texas with infographics etc.Ny times article