An appeals court on Wednesday (October 5th) ruled illegal a flagship program from the Obama years protecting "Dreamers", who arrived illegally in the United States when they were minors, a decision that does not remove the rights of current beneficiaries.
The judges confirmed a first instance decision limiting the scope of this program, thus blocking any new application, but maintained the status of the approximately 600,000 young people who already benefit from it.
The Court of Appeal returns the judgment at first instance, and in particular the care of studying the new version, forged by the Biden administration in August, of this program, called DACA.
Implemented in 2012 under Democratic President Barack Obama, it is intended to protect from deportation these “Dreamers” (“dreamers”), who entered illegally during their childhood in the United States, where they have lived since.
But Donald Trump canceled it in 2017, opening a period of great uncertainty for these young adults under 30.
In June 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States had inflicted a snub on him by validating this program.
'Deeply disappointed'
But, basing its decision on procedural issues, the Supreme Court had not completely closed the legal battle.
In July 2021, a judge partially invalidated the program, finding that the former Democratic president had exceeded his powers by acting by decree, after having failed to pass this reform in Congress.
It was this decision, contested by the Biden administration, which was confirmed on Wednesday.
This program prevents beneficiaries from being deported and gives them a social security number, essential to work, drive or study in the United States.
Homeland Security Minister Alejandro Mayorkas said he was
"deeply disappointed"
by the decision on Wednesday evening and again called on Congress to legislate to anchor the program in law.
The House of Representatives, with a Democratic majority, has already passed a text, but the Republicans, who have a blocking minority in Congress, are opposed to the provisions of the reform, which makes its adoption, as it stands , unlikely.
