Bipartisan Bill to Protect DACA Recipients Introduced

Bipartisan Bill to Protect DACA Recipients Introduced
Written by Joshua Breisblatt

A bipartisan group of Senators introduced a bill on Friday to temporarily protect individuals eligible for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

Senators Durbin (D-IL), Feinstein (D-CA), Graham (R-SC), and Murkowski (R-AK) introduced the Bar Removal of Individuals who Dream and Grow our Economy (BRIDGE) Act, which would provide work authorization and relief from deportation to individuals who are eligible for the DACA initiative created in 2012 by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Under DACA, eligible individuals who arrived in the United States as children, pass a background check and meet specific age, education, and United States residency requirements, are granted a temporary reprieve from deportation and are eligible to receive a renewable two-year work permit. Currently, over 741,000 individuals have received DACA.

Many Republicans have long taken issue with DACA because it was done through the executive and not through legislation. President-elect Trump promised on the campaign trail that he would repeal President Obama’s executive actions, including DACA. Therefore, with Trump taking office next month, an effort to replace DACA with something from Congress is being undertaken by these senators.

While actual text of the legislation is not yet available and will need to be examined carefully once introduced, various media outlets have reported on thedetails of the bill, as well as a factsheet describing the legislation. According to those reports, the BRIDGE Act would provide what the bill calls “provisional protected presence,” relief from deportation, and employment authorization for three years to DACA-eligible individuals.

Under the bill, individuals who are not DACA recipients but who are eligible for DACA would be able to apply. Like DACA, this bill would require individuals to pay a fee, undergo a background check and show they meet the eligibility criteria.

When discussing the bipartisan legislation on the Senate floor earlier this week, Senator Durbin said:

I’m glad to say that Lindsey Graham, the senator from South Carolina, and I are joining in an effort to draw up legislation to achieve that goal and at least to give those eligible for DACA a temporary reprieve so if there is elimination of this executive action, we don’t eliminate the protection that keeps them here in the United States, where they cannot be deported, and they have a chance to work.

Other Republicans also seem open to the legislation, including Senator Tillis (R-NC) who reacted to the introduction of the bill saying, “I think we could look at this and maybe identify a broader base of people who may be willing to support it.” Senator Flake (R-AZ) also expressed his support for finding a way to ensure that those with DACA are able to remain in the U.S.

Time magazine reported Trump dialing his anti-DACA rhetoric back a bit when he told them:

“We’re going to work something out that’s going to make people happy and proud…They got brought here at a very young age, they’ve worked here, they’ve gone to school here. Some were good students. Some have wonderful jobs. And they’re in never-never land because they don’t know what’s going to happen.”

Abruptly ending DACA would not only have a profound effect on the recipients themselves, but also on the U.S. economy. According to the Center for American Progress (CAP), ending DACA “would wipe away at least $433.4 billion from the U.S. gross domestic product, or GDP, cumulatively over a decade.”

While the bill will need to be re-introduced when Senators start their new session in January, this bipartisan effort continues to build momentum around the country to protect those eligible for DACA.

http://immigrationimpact.com/2016/12...r-economy-act/

Is President Trump waiting on this bill? If so, it would explain why he didn't end DACA immediately. It also means he has absolutely no intention of of leaving those under DACA unprotected. This bill would serve to keep the DACA illegals protected until a more permanent solution is provided. That solution will be a new comprehensive immigration reform bill that will provide them with a path to citizenship. Such a bill is supposedly being worked on right now.

It pains me to think the Trump administration may have colluded with Sen. Graham and Sen. Durbin on this bill. This bill fits perfectly into what Trump has said about using his "heart" to deal with the DACA issue. If it's true, it also means the Trump administration is not being transparent and that we are being lied to by omission.

This bill, in my opinion, could be offering an answer as to why President Trump didn't keep his promise to immediately end DACA as he promised during his campaign. 8O

https://www.alipac.us/f9/immigration...rogram-344024/

Just want to point out the above article is dated December 9, 2016.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jean

Just want to point out the above article is dated December 9, 2016.

---

Sorry, I must have missed the date during my cut and paste. Everything still applies. I assume the bill is either in committee right now or waiting on a floor date.

Jeff Flake has a bill called SAVE, and there is the ENLIST effort to give legalization through military service. The BRIDGE Act seems to be the one with more support.

Of course any legislation will be opened up for other eligible illegal aliens and then family members.

Congress has to be lobbied to kill all those bills. No "SAVE", only deport. No "ENLIST", only deport. No "BRIDGE", only deport.

Please keep your promise, Mr. President, end DACA now!

9/4/17

Coffman Thinks DACA Extension Has Enough Votes to Pass

Amnesty Red Alert: Congress may vote Tuesday!
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/e1/e1/20/e...95a0438f2f.jpg
https://www.alipac.us/f8/amnesty-red...uesday-350376/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Congress has to be lobbied to kill all those bills. No "SAVE", only deport. No "ENLIST", only deport. No "BRIDGE", only deport.

---

The date of this post was 2/24/17.

H.R.496 - BRIDGE Act

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Bipartisan Bill to Protect DACA Recipients Introduced
Written by Joshua Breisblatt

A bipartisan group of Senators introduced a bill on Friday to temporarily protect individuals eligible for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

Senators Durbin (D-IL), Feinstein (D-CA), Graham (R-SC), and Murkowski (R-AK) introduced the Bar Removal of Individuals who Dream and Grow our Economy (BRIDGE) Act, which would provide work authorization and relief from deportation to individuals who are eligible for the DACA initiative created in 2012 by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Under DACA, eligible individuals who arrived in the United States as children, pass a background check and meet specific age, education, and United States residency requirements, are granted a temporary reprieve from deportation and are eligible to receive a renewable two-year work permit. Currently, over 741,000 individuals have received DACA.

Many Republicans have long taken issue with DACA because it was done through the executive and not through legislation. President-elect Trump promised on the campaign trail that he would repeal President Obama’s executive actions, including DACA. Therefore, with Trump taking office next month, an effort to replace DACA with something from Congress is being undertaken by these senators.

While actual text of the legislation is not yet available and will need to be examined carefully once introduced, various media outlets have reported on thedetails of the bill, as well as a factsheet describing the legislation. According to those reports, the BRIDGE Act would provide what the bill calls “provisional protected presence,” relief from deportation, and employment authorization for three years to DACA-eligible individuals.

Under the bill, individuals who are not DACA recipients but who are eligible for DACA would be able to apply. Like DACA, this bill would require individuals to pay a fee, undergo a background check and show they meet the eligibility criteria.

When discussing the bipartisan legislation on the Senate floor earlier this week, Senator Durbin said:

I’m glad to say that Lindsey Graham, the senator from South Carolina, and I are joining in an effort to draw up legislation to achieve that goal and at least to give those eligible for DACA a temporary reprieve so if there is elimination of this executive action, we don’t eliminate the protection that keeps them here in the United States, where they cannot be deported, and they have a chance to work.

Other Republicans also seem open to the legislation, including Senator Tillis (R-NC) who reacted to the introduction of the bill saying, “I think we could look at this and maybe identify a broader base of people who may be willing to support it.” Senator Flake (R-AZ) also expressed his support for finding a way to ensure that those with DACA are able to remain in the U.S.

Time magazine reported Trump dialing his anti-DACA rhetoric back a bit when he told them:

“We’re going to work something out that’s going to make people happy and proud…They got brought here at a very young age, they’ve worked here, they’ve gone to school here. Some were good students. Some have wonderful jobs. And they’re in never-never land because they don’t know what’s going to happen.”

Abruptly ending DACA would not only have a profound effect on the recipients themselves, but also on the U.S. economy. According to the Center for American Progress (CAP), ending DACA “would wipe away at least $433.4 billion from the U.S. gross domestic product, or GDP, cumulatively over a decade.”

While the bill will need to be re-introduced when Senators start their new session in January, this bipartisan effort continues to build momentum around the country to protect those eligible for DACA.

http://immigrationimpact.com/2016/12...r-economy-act/

Is President Trump waiting on this bill? If so, it would explain why he didn't end DACA immediately. It also means he has absolutely no intention of of leaving those under DACA unprotected. This bill would serve to keep the DACA illegals protected until a more permanent solution is provided. That solution will be a new comprehensive immigration reform bill that will provide them with a path to citizenship. Such a bill is supposedly being worked on right now.

It pains me to think the Trump administration may have colluded with Sen. Graham and Sen. Durbin on this bill. This bill fits perfectly into what Trump has said about using his "heart" to deal with the DACA issue. If it's true, it also means the Trump administration is not being transparent and that we are being lied to by omission.

This bill, in my opinion, could be offering an answer as to why President Trump didn't keep his promise to immediately end DACA as he promised during his campaign. 8O

---

No, an exact bill was introduced in the House called the BRIDGE ACT in January. That is not why Trump waited. Trump waited to let it expire in June, but in June a lawsuit that was supposed to be dismissed on the expiration date of DACA 2012, June 15, was extended to June 30, and then on June 30 the lawsuit dismissal was extended to September 5th at the request of the Texas-led plaintiffs. That's why Trump went ahead and canceled the DACA Expansion and the DAPA on June 15, but held up on DACA 2012 because the ruling in that lawsuit required that DACA 2012 continue in effect during the course of the lawsuit.

This whole thread comes mighty close to possibly proving Trump may have actually lied to us before he was elected. Seems he may have purposely kept the DACA program alive until a legislative fix could be provided.

Yes, I'm suggesting he may have never intended on ending DACA as he promised during his campaign.

In early February, they announced they were going to let it expire in June. If it expires, you don't have to send out 800,000 cancellation letters, wait for their replies under separate DHS laws and procedures, then reply to those, each and every one of them explaining why they've been canceled. If it expires, it's just over. No correspondence, no whines, no replies, no lawyers, no refunds, nada. It's just ... over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

In early February, they announced they were going to let it expire in June. If it expires, you don't have to send out 800,000 cancellation letters, wait for their replies under separate DHS laws and procedures, then reply to those, each and every one of them explaining why they've been canceled. If it expires, it's just over. No correspondence, no whines, no replies, no lawyers, no refunds, nada. It's just ... over.

---

If the rumors are true, the program is not going to be "just over". Furthermore, the program does not expire. There is no official 'sunset' date for DACA and never has been.

Who is this "they" you're referring to? The only one that ever mentioned an expiration date was Sean Spicer. He briefly mentioned something about it to White House reporters (I watched the brief). However, no expiration date has ever been mentioned anywhere else to my knowledge. Mr. Spicer probably just mispoke or was misinformed. You sure are placing a lot of your argument on a one sentence 'blurb' from Spicer. If you have an official document that shows an official sunset date on DACA, I'd be interested in seeing it.

If the rumors ending up being true and Trump does continue the program another six months to give the U.S. Congress enough time to pass a legislative fix for DACA members and those eligible for DACA, then we'll pretty much know his intent has always been to keep the program alive until the the congress can provide an amnesty fix. Furthermore, that could actually mean he decieved us prior to being elected and never intended on ending DACA "immediately" as promised.

We all know Trump does support amnesty because he has actually said as much! His claiming not to support an amnesty was obviously another lie he told us during his campaign.

Oh for god's sake, it was a 2 year program, subject to renewal, no sunset provision applied. It began as a 2 year program on June 15, 2012. It was RENEWED for another 2 years on June 5, 2014, by the Director of USCIS. The renewal was extended to 3 years in November of 2014 by Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security and in that same MEMO, Johnson provided for the DACA Expansion and DAPA. That's why the program expired on June 15, 2017 but for the extensions related to the extensions of the Texas lawsuit whose ruling required that DACA 2012 continue in effect during the course of the lawsuit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

If the rumors are true, the program is not going to be "just over". Furthermore, the program does not expire. There is no official 'sunset' date for DACA and never has been.

Who is this "they" you're referring to? The only one that ever mentioned an expiration date was Sean Spicer. He briefly mentioned something about it to White House reporters (I watched the brief). However, no expiration date has ever been mentioned anywhere else to my knowledge. Mr. Spicer probably just mispoke or was misinformed. You sure are placing a lot of your argument on a one sentence 'blurb' from Spicer. If you have an official document that shows an official sunset date on DACA, I'd be interested in seeing it.

If the rumors ending up being true and Trump does continue the program another six months to give the U.S. Congress enough time to pass a legislative fix for DACA members and those eligible for DACA, then we'll pretty much know his intent has always been to keep the program alive until the the congress can provide an amnesty fix. Furthermore, that could actually mean he decieved us prior to being elected and never intended on ending DACA "immediately" as promised.

We all know Trump does support amnesty because he has actually said as much! His claiming not to support an amnesty was obviously another lie he told us during his campaign.

---

Trump doesn't support amnesty no matter how many times you lie about it on this forum. You've been reading too many leftie conquer and divide fake news articles, MW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Oh for god's sake, it was a 2 year program, subject to renewal, no sunset provision applied. It began as a 2 year program on June 15, 2012. It was RENEWED for another 2 years on June 5, 2014, by the Director of USCIS. The renewal was extended to 3 years in November of 2014 by Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security and in that same MEMO, Johnson provided for the DACA Expansion and DAPA. That's why the program expired on June 15, 2017 but for the extensions related to the extensions of the Texas lawsuit whose ruling required that DACA 2012 continue in effect during the course of the lawsuit.

---

No, the Texas lawsuit had nothing to do with DACA. The lawsuit was concerning DAPA and the DACA extension (2 to 3 year EADs). Of course the EADs are the work authorizations. The judge did not rule on DACA because it was not part of the actual lawsuit, however, he did say DACA was "most likely" unconstitutional.

The actual DACA program does not have an expiration date per se, but the EADs and I-797 Notice of Action forms do. Both of those forms expire 24 months after issuance but are currently renewable. So no, there is no set date for the DACA program to expire in its entirety for everyone simultaneously. Furthermore, nothing expires if it is continued. So, generally speaking the program has never expired and it was never intended to unless the Secretary of DHS or the President of the United States ended it.

Honestly, I don't even know why we're having this discussion because it's here nor there. Truth being, there has never been any question in anyones mind that President Trump or the Secretary of DHS has complete authority to end DACA at anytime and on a moments notice. You're the only person I've heard question the Trump administrations authority to end the program. The leaders of FAIR, NumbersUSA, ALIPAC and CIS have not questioned it. Of course I understand your motive is to protect Trump by providing him cover, but attempting to give the impression he can't do something that is within his power to do is not honest.

Yeah, they've all proven themselves to be extremely fact-sloppy. I bet like you, they didn't even know that DACA 2012 was renewed in 2014 for 2 more years or that the 2 year renewal of the program was increased to a 3 year program that expired June 15, 2017. Trump knew. I knew. Sean Spicer knew. The whole White House knew. Why didn't these organizations know? Why didn't you know? You pretend not to know even after I told you!

SAD!!

:)