by Adina Appelbaum
Twitter: @abappelbaum
On July
15, 2012, the Obama Administration announced the Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals (DACA) initiative, a program that has the potential to help as many as
1.76 million young immigrants avoid deportation
and obtain work authorization for two years.
To qualify for the program, individuals must be under the
age of 31; have arrived in the U.S. before turning 16 and resided in the country
for at least five years; be enrolled in or have graduated from high school (or
have a GED or be a veteran); and have no felonies or significant misdemeanors,
among other requirements.
 |
|
Undocumented students line up at
Navy Pier to apply for deferred action.
|
DACA
represents a step in the right direction for child and young adult immigrant
rights. In the short-term, applicants granted deferred action may be free from deportation,
obtain crucial employment authorization and a Social Security number, have an incentive
to stay in school, and be able to “come out” from living in the shadows of
lacking proper legal documentation.
On
the other hand, the significant uncertainty of DACA as a discretionary
presidential action, which makes no permanent legal change in a person’s immigration
status, means there is a substantial chance it could do more harm than good. The
risks are even greater for unaccompanied children. The precarious nature of
DACA is arguably not in line with the intentions of Articles II and III of the Convention on the Rights of the
Child (CRC) to prohibit
discrimination and promote the best interests of the child. DACA’s weaknesses
thus represent an opportunity to illuminate why a more comprehensive
immigration reform is needed.
