Issues & Insights

COVID-19 Makes The Case Against Reversing DACA

Rhododendrites

Since 2012, the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative has granted lawful status to live and work in the United States to more than 800,000 undocumented young adults who came to the country as children. The Supreme Court is expected soon to deliver its judgment on a Trump administration’s DACA reversal that would make the hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients vulnerable to deportation.

From the perspective of liberty, the moral stakes are evident. DACA recipients did not have agency in the course of events that brought them to the United States. Many recipients were so young when they arrived in the U.S. that they have no memory of their birth countries. To regard them as transgressors of the law has little merit.

Nor, it should be added, have DACA recipients gone astray as adults – felony and significant misdemeanor convictions are disqualifying. DACA recipients are peaceful, productive members of our society who could be forcibly uprooted from the lives they’ve built in the United States if the Court rules in the administration’s favor.

While the moral argument against reversing DACA is enduring, in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic a Supreme Court decision supporting the reversal would be uniquely damaging as it could lead to the withdrawal of thousands of DACA recipients who are working in fields essential to our survival. The liberty to chart a course in the United States benefits not only the DACA recipients, but all of us who exchange with them, directly and indirectly, through the marketplace.

When contemplating the impending Supreme Court decision, think about people such as Hina Naveed. She is a registered nurse in New York City who volunteers on the front lines of the pandemic through New York’s Medical Reserve Corps. She is also a DACA recipient who came to the United States from Pakistan at age 10. According to research from New American Economy, there were over 60,000 DACA-eligible individuals working in health care in 2018. The same study registered 280,000 undocumented health care workers in total, of whom over 50,000 work in coronavirus-ravaged New York and New Jersey. More people like Ms. Naveen, not fewer, would make us better off.

According to a Center for American Progress analysis of American Community Survey microdata, the importance of DACA recipients to our pandemic resilience extends well beyond health care. Steven Camarota, of the Center for Immigration Studies, takes pain to diminish the role DACA recipients are playing in health care in his recent National Review essay, but his argument overlooks the more than 150,000 DACA recipients who are working in other essential fields. For example, more than one in four DACA recipients works in a food-related sector. While doctors and nurses are getting rounds of applause when shifts turn over, the unsung heroes of this crisis are the people who are growing, packing, and delivering food to Americans in lockdown across the country.

Additionally, according to an analysis from the Center for Migration Studies, more than 21,000 DACA recipients work in essential transportation and warehousing and over 13,000 work in building services and waste management.

Whether these workers were born in the U.S. or somewhere else, the goods and services they provide are essential to sustaining us through this crisis.

While this case brings to the fore legitimate questions about executive power, there is no doubt that DACA as a matter of policy enhances our strength in the face of the coronavirus, as well as our standing as a society that values liberty. In the throes of this pandemic, the economic importance of DACA recipients is all the more apparent. DACA gave hundreds of thousands of young adults the legal confidence needed to work for an honest living, i.e., the freedom to choose a field and to trade in-demand goods and services. A Supreme Court ruling against them would extinguish that.

What’s more, many thousands of these young people have chosen to work in fields that are essential to our coronavirus resilience, such as health care and food services. DACA recipients’ liberty is obviously of the utmost importance to the recipients themselves, to their families, to their friends, to their employers, and to their employees, but the coronavirus crisis has highlighted their valuable contributions to our well-being. The continued economic liberty of the DACA recipients would be a benefit to us all.

Jordan McGillis is a policy analyst based in San Francisco.

We Could Use Your Help

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists from the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to use our decades of experience to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we think our approach to commentary is sorely lacking both in today’s mainstream media and on the internet. You can help us keep our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

You can also subscribe to I&I: It's free!

Just enter your email address below to get started.

7 comments

  • Ah, from San Fran…that explains the viewpoint. So it’s OK to ignore the law if one is an illegal or DACA recipient…but a citizen business owner must lose their livelihood by adhering to King Lord Newsom’s edicts or be arrested and jailed if they dare venture to a Cali beach. Got it.

  • Sorry, moral authority went south when their parents brought them in illegally. Rule of law only works when it applies to all.

  • The article is flush with excuses for suspending our immigration policies, and fairly dripping with liberal tears. Allowing DACA to remain as a policy encourages more lawbreaking. THAT overshadows any emotional drivel or individual anecdotes of how precious these lawbreakers are.

  • DACA was unconstitutionally begun, even his Highness Obama said he did not have the power until he suddenly did. Congress has to pass the Dream act for it to be legal.

  • Children of bank robbers should be allowed to keep a share of the loot when their parents are captured. It’s not their fault.

    It’s not common to find such a poorly thought out argument on I&I.

  • First and foremost DACA is clearly unconstitutional. Beyond that, if left in place, DACA will only encourage more foreign nationals to bring their children and illegally enter the U.S. I mean wouldn’t you if you knew eventually your kids would get to stay legally?

  • As I understand it, those advocating for DACA recipients are insisting on FULL citizenship, not just access to a green card and freedom from worry about deportation. Full citizenship would enable a DACA recipient to legalize the parents who broke the law when they brought their minor children to this country illegally in the first place.

  • [print-me target="#post-%ID%"]

Subscribe to Issues & Insights via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to I&I and you can receive notifications of new articles in your email. It’s simple, and free.

Join 4,041 other subscribers

Donations

If you like what you see, feel free to leave a donation. You can also set up regular donations if you like. Just click on the Tip Jar above. It will take you to a PayPal donations page. Your contributions will help us defray the cost of running this site. (Please note that we are not set up as a charitable organization, so donations aren't tax deductible.) Thank you!

About Issues & Insights

Issues & Insights is run by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page. Our goal is to bring our decades of combined journalism experience to help readers understand the top issues of the day. We’re doing this on a voluntary basis, because we believe the nation needs the kind of cogent, rational, data-driven, fact-based commentary that we can provide. 

%d bloggers like this: