Yesterday there was a press call with DREAM eligible young adults and immigration experts who are asking President Obama to stop the deportations of these young people. As you will recall, the DREAM Act was defeated in the Senate last December after having passed in the House. Since the new Congress is even more polarized and seemingly less inclined to take up immigration reform because of the prominence of the Tea Party, activists and DREAM eligible youth are asking the administration to stop deporting youth who would have been legalized had this legislation passed.
As I mentioned a few weeks ago, the administration has not indicated that it would selectively enforce existing immigration laws. This point has been reiterated by Cecilia Muñoz a few times now, most recently on Univision a few days ago.
On yesterday’s press call, Marshall Fitz of the Center for American Progress explained that there are instances where the Department of Homeland Security has used its discretion in policy enforcement in the current and in the previous Bush administration. Although it seems that there is some room for discretion, Fitz reiterated that the these types of discretionary decisions to halt deportations or to grant relief to a class of people are only temporary and that only the legislature can solve the status problem. He also cited an instance of where President George W. Bush deferred the enforced departure of Liberians back in 2007. You can read more about that here. At the time, the Department of Homeland Security explained:
“The authority to allow for deferred enforced departure (DED) of a class of aliens derives from the President’s constitutional powers to conduct foreign relations. It is an authority exercised previously by President George W. Bush and by Presidents William J. Clinton and George H. W. Bush. Although DED is not a specific immigration status, individuals covered by DED are not subject to enforcement actions to remove them from the United States, usually for a specific period of time.”
After Fitz explained that President Obama does have these powers to provide some relief to DREAM eligible youth, four young adults (Maria Marroquin, Rigo Padilla, Karen Maldonado, and Gaby Pacheco), who would benefit from passage of the DREAM Act, spoke.
Maria Marroquin said, “Having the president say he would not target us would alleviate some of the burden we feel every day. The ball is in the President’s court. Personally I’m ready to hold him accountable to his decision, and I’ll make sure the Latino community holds him accountable as well.”
Rigo Padilla added this, while acknowledging the President’s support for the DREAM Act in the past, “We thank the President for his support of the DREAM Act and comprehensive immigration reform, but now we need action, not just words.”
The DREAM Act eligible participants on the call basically reiterated that they had done nothing wrong and were tired of living in constant fear of deportation because of the disruptive nature of DHS’s practices. Gaby Pacheco even stated that she felt that it was easier to ask for deferred action during the Bush administration than presently.
In essence, we are witnessing the next steps of the DREAM Activist movement, where having recently exhausted the legislative action, pressure is being put on the President to act. This week 22 Senators also sent a letter to the President asking him to grant deferred action to qualified DREAMers.
Should any sort of deferred action be granted, I think it could be a face saving move for the President with those members of the Latino community who are more invested in immigrant rights. If no action is taken, I suspect that the DREAM Activists will try to hold the administration accountable in other ways while continuing to fight deportations on an case by case basis. Just this week, one of the founders of DREAM Activist, Prerna Lal, received a notice of removal while in the middle of law school finals.
Stay tuned for more information about the ever changing immigration crisis.
