Immigration Activists to Hold Vigils in Nashville and Memphis Tonight to Promote DACA Amnesty

Supporters of allowing DACA recipients to remain permanently in the U.S. will hold a vigil this evening outside the Nashville offices of Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Bob Corker (R-TN) on West End Avenue.

The vigil at 6:30 p.m. is organized by the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition (TIRRC) and JUMP (Jóvenes Unidos por un Mejor Presente, or Youth United for a Better Present). A similar vigil sponsored by TIRRC and the Memphis Youth Association will be held at City Hall in Memphis at 6 p.m.

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program was started by former President Obama with an executive order and granted illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children temporary permission to live and work in the U.S. if they met certain criteria. In September, President Trump rescinded DACA and turned the issue over to Congress to consider a legislative solution. Nearly 800,000 young people nationally have been granted DACA status and there currently are around 690,000 recipients, including more than 8,300 in Tennessee.

Activists want Congress to pass a “clean” DACA bill granting residency without approval for the legislation being contingent on funding for a border wall and strengthened interior immigration enforcement, as President Trump and other Republicans want. Some conservatives are wholly against any extension of DACA, saying a DACA amnesty would encourage more illegal immigration and additional amnesties, including for other young illegal immigrants already here but who didn’t meet the DACA criteria because of their date of arrival.

In October, Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on DACA. She said that if DACA recipients are allowed to stay in the U.S., they would over time likely sponsor at least an additional 1.4 million relatives who would come live in the U.S. To curb this chain migration, she said that if DACA is approved, the government should limit family migration categories.

Vaughan also raised concerns about the many DACA recipients who have minimal education and are low-skilled.

“This means that they are in direct competition for jobs with some of the most vulnerable American and legal immigrant workers,” she said.

In addition, Vaughan criticized the lax screening procedures that were used to grant DACA status. She said:

The public image of the DACA recipients that has been carefully cultivated by activists and their allies is that they are young people who were “brought” to the United States at a young age through no fault of their own, are well-educated, have a clean background, have gone through a rigorous screening process, and are now indistinguishable from the best and brightest American youths.

The reality is that the DACA eligibility criteria were quite lenient and the screening of applications was cursory. To qualify, applicants were supposed to be aged 15-31, present in the United States illegally by June 15, 2012, with continuous residence for at least five years prior, and must have arrived by age of 16. They were supposed to have completed high school or a GED program or higher, or be enrolled in some kind of educational program (loosely defined) at the time of application.

A clean criminal history was not required; applicants could have up to two misdemeanor convictions (or multiple misdemeanors if they were associated with two separate incidents). Felony or misdemeanor convictions having to do with illegal status, such as identity theft or immigration fraud, were excused. Among the crimes that would not necessarily disqualify an alien for DACA: child pornography, child abuse, assault, kidnapping, larceny, robbery, theft, voter fraud, petty theft, possession of drug paraphernalia, public intoxication, fleeing from an officer, disorderly conduct, vandalism, indecent exposure, prostitution, and trespassing. “Minor” traffic offenses, such as driving without a license or insurance, or reckless driving, were not disqualifying, even if considered criminal under state laws.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) had adopted a notorious “get to yes” culture and emphasized speed of processing over careful review. There was no requirement that applicants be interviewed, and few were. Claims made by applicants and documents submitted to support the application were not routinely or randomly verified. Many of the documents required for the application, such as residency information, diplomas, and even identity documents, were possible to produce on a home computer, or could easily be obtained from document vendors, often operating on the internet. The agency adjudicators were told to accept electronic messages such as e-mails and even text messages as “proof” of claims. Applicants were not required to demonstrate proficiency in English.

The vigil in Memphis this evening will promote continued Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations as well as a “clean” DACA bill. TPS is granted to people from certain countries affected by natural disasters or war. President Trump has ended TPS for Haitians who came to the U.S. after the 2010 earthquake in their country. Trump has also ended TPS for Sudan and Nicaragua but has delayed a decision on Honduras until July.