The Aftermath of the Supreme Court
Decision on DACA
Salvador Carranza
1) The Trump Administrations’ ruling was arbitrary in that it cut corners by not considering the ramifications and impact that the decision would have on families,
communities and the country.


DACA recipients contribute $460 billion in GDP over ten years, $2 billion in Social Security. $470 million in Medicare contributions and $16 billion in federal taxes
and more, all of which would be lost if DACA was rescinded.  It is estimated that $6.3 billion a year would be needed to replace what would be lost from DACA
recipients.

2)The Trump Administration’s decision also needed to consider whether other options existed that would be less arbitrary such as what would be the impact if say
the protection from deportation would be kept, but some of the benefits would be rescinded. And that preserving families and communities are an interest that are
Important and should matter and be considered.

3) What seems to be the consensus is that for now DACA not only remains legal but also has to return to its original status. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services (USCIS) should start new applications and renewals to be accepted and processed. However because the Trump Administration could issue a new order,
USCIS has not issued any information about this yet.

4) There is a hope that a new order to rescind DACA will not be issued in an election year as DACA is supported by over 80 percent of the population. Nevertheless,
it could happen and another lawsuit from Texas is still moving through the courts that could impact DACA. Neither of these are likely to be reviewed by the Supreme
Court before the November elections.

So for now, DACA recipients are safe, but we need to remain vigilant and know that the best way to a permanent solution is to elect a new President and House of
Representatives and Senate allies that can move forward a path to permanency and eventual citizenship not only for current DACA recipients but also for all
positive contributing undocumented members in our country.
By Salvador Carranza from information provided by the Association of Landmark
Universities

In a 5-4 decision with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the majority opinion, ruled
that the Trump Administration’s decision to end Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals (DACA) was arbitrary and allowed DACA , with its original intent, to stand
until the administration develops a more rational and defensible reason for ending
the program.  In a national webinar sponsored by the Association of Public Landmark
Universities (APLU) with a panelist that included the University of California Legal
Counsel that defended DACA answered questions from participants on the meaning
of the ruling and what is next.

The Trump Administration immediately stated that they will rewrite their legal
challenge to address the concerns that the Supreme Court stressed.  If the Trump
Administration goes ahead with a new decision to end DACA, they will need to
address what is called threshold matters in the Supreme Curt’s decision, mainly: