MORE THAN THREE DOZEN child advocacy organizations say White House officials failed to account for a quarter of a million children born in the U.S. whose parents are protected by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program when they repealed it in 2017.
Now they're appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the fate of 250,000 children whose lives, they say, would be upended should the justices uphold the Trump administration's decision to eliminate DACA – a move that would almost certainly damage the children's mental and physical well-being, introduce a whole host of traumatic stress disorders, cut off access to reliable health care and cause income and food insecurity.
"These children are endangered not only by the actual detention and deportation of their parents, but also the looming fear of deportation," the groups wrote in an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court last week. "The imminent threat of losing DACA protection places children at risk of losing parental nurturance, as well as losing income, food security, housing, access to health care, educational opportunities, and the sense of safety and security that is the foundation of healthy child development."
The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which the Obama administration established in 2012, allows young undocumented adults who came to the U.S. as children to apply for protection from deportation. To qualify, applicants must have graduated from high school or served in the military, among other criteria like not having a criminal record and being able to pass a background check.
As it stands, about 700,000 people are protected under DACA, which also allows them to work in the U.S. and enroll in services like health insurance.
The Trump administration announced in 2017 that it would end DACA, arguing that rescinding the program is in line with its immigration agenda and would help stem the tide of adults streaming across the southern border with young children.
The decision was challenged in U.S. District Courts in California, the District of Columbia and New York on the basis that eliminating the program violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the rights of DACA recipients. All three judges ordered the government to uphold the program, prompting the Trump administration to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The justices are set to hear arguments Nov. 12, and will be tasked with deciding whether the government's decision to end DACA is something that's reviewable by the courts at all – the Trump administration says it isn't – and, if so, whether the decision to end DACA is legal.
As recently as Wednesday, President Trump said his predecessor had no authority to initiate the DACA program in the first place, and that if the Supreme Court overturns it, as it should, Congress would likely find a legislative solution to allowing DACA recipients to remain in the U.S.
"The Republicans and Democrats will have a DEAL to let them stay in our Country, in very short order," he tweeted Wednesday. "It would actually benefit DACA, and be done the right way!"
As it stands, nearly 1.5 million individuals live in households with a DACA recipient, including more than a quarter million U.S.-born children, who are citizens, of DACA recipients, according to the 2017 American Community Survey. In a dozen states more than 5,000 U.S.-born children have a parent who is a DACA recipient, including in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee and Texas.
In California, 73,000 U.S.-born children have a parent who is a DACA recipient, and in Texas 47,000 U.S.-born children have a parent who is a DACA recipient.
In the 46-page amicus brief, the advocacy groups argue that rescinding DACA would shut out current recipients from the labor market, resulting in many of them losing health insurance and putting them at risk of falling into poverty, all of which would have a negative impact on their children. Threats of deportation aside, just the stress of instability that's transmitted to their children is harmful, advocates argue.
"A key reason why even the threat of rescission damages child health is because family instability and parental stress can undermine parent-child attachment and child well-being," they wrote. "Further, if families experience increased housing and economic instability due to avoidance of immigration enforcement actions, children can suffer great harm to their developing minds and bodies. Children's mental health and social-emotional development is inextricably linked to that of their parents and caregivers, and their parents' stress has a collateral impact on them."
Children's health experts have been sounding the alarm on the impact of toxic stress inflicted on children impacted by the Trump administration's immigration agenda. Studies have linked toxic stress to developmental issues with children's brains and bodies and an increase in their risk of disorders ranging from diabetes to depression, heart disease, cancer, addiction and premature death.
"The well-being of children and the importance of family preservation are fundamental values in our society," they wrote in the amicus brief. "DACA recipients were brought here as children and given no other choice of home. Many of these recipients are now parents of U.S.-born children. Rescinding DACA puts these children at immediate risk and threatens their families with forced separation, in direct contravention of our nation's core commitment to protect children. At a minimum, the government should weigh these concerns carefully in considering whether to rescind DACA."
For more information, go to: http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment