“Is there a human being that does not deserve to be here or one that does not deserve to breathe the same air?” (Dr. Joseph Connell Esq.) The many recipients of DACA, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, are now asking themselves this very question. The Obama Administration put this program into place in 2012 to give Dreamers an opportunity to legally work and attend college. Dreamers were brought to the United States illegally by their parents when they were under the age of sixteen and DACA provides them protection from deportation and authorization to work. On September 5, 2017, the Trump Administration announced the end of this program as part of their anti-immigration campaign, simply pulling away all hope these recipients once had for their future.  

Jade R. Gardener wrote “Expecting the Inevitable: DACA and Mental Health”, a political and health journal, following the rescind of this program, which fits the genre of putting forth political and medical aspects, all while portraying a purpose of bringing to light the effect that this has on Dreamers’ mental and psychological health. The medium is a journal made to reach an academic audience, which limits the audience to academically fluent people. Due to this, a clear and cohesive argument is created amongst those that are able to understand, while potentially creating interest in those that come across the article without understanding it. Gardener is very credible, providing lots of facts to support her claim, yet she takes the stance of remaining strongly against the removal of DACA based on the effects it has on Dreamers and their families. Dreamers are living with a constant fear of deportation no matter where they go, whether its work, home, or simply when walking in the streets. School officials are realizing that both parents and children have become more stressed and withdrawn at times with this added weight on their shoulders. They start to pull themselves away from their friends and avoid going out with them because of this fear. Mental health service requests have since taken a drastic increase, especially in those who feel that they are now losing their only opportunity to legally provide for their family. In a small study done by Shirley Leyro, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Sociology at Borough of Manhattan Community College, language used by Dreamers in regard to their anxiety and fear of deportation revealed to be consistent with language used in studies of PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). Leyro claims, “Deportation is legal violence.” The increase in emotional and psychological distress internalized by the Dreamers along with their decreased rate of accessible medical care leaves them vulnerable to a risk of untreated mental health conditions, which when multiplied may cause suicidal behavior. The mental health issues affecting DACA recipients will continue to become more evident in society as the uncertainty of Dreamers’ future increases, potentially turning into a mental health crisis.  

In October 2017, shortly following the rescind of DACA, a coalition of immigration lawyers and sixteen Democratic state attorneys filed various suits in Brooklyn, claiming that “repealing the program was an illegally ‘arbitrary’ act that showed an unconstitutional ‘animus’ towards Latinos” (Feuer). Using the newspaper as his medium, Alan Feuer wrote the article “Justice Department Seeks the End of DACA Lawsuits” in the New York Times to fulfill the purpose of objectively informing people with an update of the suits filed against the government. Maintaining his political genre, Feuer holds an objective stance and tone by solely providing information about the lawsuits. He focuses on reaching a professional audience familiar with the legalities of government. The plaintiffs argue that the government failed to provide Dreamers with a notice that DACA was going to end, therefore violating their due process rights. However, the government responded by stating that since DACA was an executive action put into place without legislation, they “not only have the powers to rescind it but also that their decision was ‘presumed immune from judicial review’” (Feuer). They also claim that the program was never actually meant to provide Dreamers with ‘due process protections.’ The Trump Administration views DACA as unconstitutional based on the end of DAPA, Deferred Action for Parents of Americans. DAPA was made to protect the mothers and fathers of Dreamers and was rescinded in February 2015 after the ruling of a federal judge in Texas and the upholding of this ruling by the Supreme Court. The plaintiffs continue to argue that rescinding DACA went against the Administrative Procedure Act, which claims that government policies can only be ended with a rational explanation, yet the Justice Department says that an ‘orderly’ repeal of DACA was itself rational. According to the department, the plaintiffs have yet to provide any evidence to prove that the repeal of DACA was discriminatory. Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis, who had “expressed withering skepticism of the government’s case” against DACA (Feuer), was next to consider these suits, still leaving the fate of Dreamers up in the air.  

Fast forward to January 2018, U.S. District Judge William Alsup, a federal judge in California appointed by President Clinton, rules that the Trump Administration acted unconstitutionally by ending DACA. Alan Gomez’s article for USA Today “Court Victory for Dreamers May Prove Short-Lived” was written to satisfy the purpose of informing people about this new ruling, especially creating a stronger argument regarding an audience of those who may be affected. Gomez’s stance and tone remain objective throughout his writing as he provides facts and quotes about the new ruling. The language used consists of mainly legal terms allowing for Gomez’s political genre to be reached and understood by an audience whose daily lives can be influenced by these decisions. According to Gomez, Alsup ruled that the Trump Administration provided flawed legal reasoning for the end of the program. Sarah Huckabee Sanders called Alsup’s ruling “outrageous” since DACA was an “unconstitutional action”. Alsup, however, disagreed and ordered the Department of Homeland Security to resume the program on March 5, unless the Trump Administration and Congress can reach a compromise for its renewal. Michael Tan, an attorney at the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, says “Courts review the reasons agencies provides for making decisions all the time. In this case, the decision to end DACA was based on a legal error. That’s not a legitimate basis for ending the program.” The Justice Department had multiple options on how to proceed. They could appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, and if they lose this appeal they’d go onto the Supreme Court. On the other hand, they could also repeal their order to end DACA and immediately place a new one with a different legal argument. According to Andrew Pincus, a Washington D.C. immigration attorney, “The administration can come back the next day and say, ‘OK, were going to invalidate DACA for these other reasons.’ There would be another lawsuit, but that would then be a difficult lawsuit to win.” The fate of DACA continues to remain uncertain and many Dreamers seemed to rush to submit their renewals for the program. Gomez candidly explains the unpredictability of the future of DACA leaving Dreamers uneased and fearful of what is to come. 

President Trump is known for his intensive use of Twitter throughout both his campaign and his presidency. He posts his thoughts in regard to various political issues, whether it be about immigration, finances, or all parts of his campaign. He uses this medium to talk to an audience including people of the United States in his own ‘voice’, as opposed to solely through other news media that can potentially skew his views. The language he uses through the genre of social media is very informal as he demonstrates his biased tone towards DACA. On April 2, 2018, President Trump tweeted, “DACA is dead because the Democrats didn’t care or act, and now everyone wants to get onto the DACA bandwagon… No longer works. Must build Wall and secure our borders with proper Border legislation. Democrats want No Borders, hence drugs and crime!” Ever since his election campaign, Donald Trump has been strongly against illegal immigration and very set on getting a southern border wall built as a way to minimize future illegal immigration. As a main focus of his campaign, his plans for immigration continues to be largely controversial and a main point of discussion within government and the people of the United States. The administration had from January to March to come to an agreement on the renewal of DACA and they failed. The purpose of this tweet was to explain how strongly he believes the Democrats are at fault. President Trump reveals his frustration with the administration, especially the Democratic party, as he’s fights to build a wall in exchange for the continuation of DACA. The Democrats stand their ground strongly against the wall that Trump feels is the only way to benefit the nation and crack down on illegal immigration. Up until now, Dreamers have yet to reach an absolute response on where their fate lands, mostly due to the lack of compromise on both sides of the nation. President Trump places all the fault onto the Democrats for refusing his multiple offers at a compromise. The question remains, will Dreamers continue to be seen as illegal humans, as pawns the government can use to negotiate their own terms within themselves, as humans who don’t have a right to the opportunities available to others? 

The fate of Dreamers has been uncertain for years now and, yet, there lacks any sort of idealistic path as to where their future may lie. They are left with a constant feeling of anxiety and doubt in themselves. Will be they forced to leave all they know, or will there be a solution that allows them to actually become citizens? Gardener, Feuer, Gomez, and Trump all seem to have their own stance on this crucial issue, and each of their stances appeal to a different group of people. Gardener remains strongly against the repeal of DACA throughout her writing while President Trump is responsible for its repeal. They hold opposing views on DACA and are both evidently biased. Despite her use to facts and quotes from various outside sources, including Shirley Leyro and ​Ivelyse​ ​Andino,​ ​Founder​ ​and​ ​Chief​ ​Executive​ ​Officer of​ ​the​ ​social​ ​impact​ ​organization,​ ​Radical​ ​Health, Gardener only provides information that is against the removal of DACA. President Trump, on the other hand, has been openly anti-immigration since the start of his election campaign and has never expressed support for immigration. Gardener’s credibility stems from her use of quotes and statistics to back her claim, while President Trump only holds credibility from his position in government. He doesn’t necessarily use any outside facts or research to support his claim; he just speaks his mind. Nonetheless, people still hold some integrity to his claims due to his reputation. 

Moreover, Feuer and Gomez hold a more similar stance on the issue. They both seem indifferent to the repeal, while each expressing information that would interest similar audiences. Feuer focuses on the cases filed against the governments repeal while Gomez expresses information about the lack of protection available for Dreamers. Gomez holds credibility because since he writes for USA Today, his work is fact-checked by multiple people and he is sure to include quotes of various opinions from credible people. Gomez quotes Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer in saying that “The only way to guarantee legal status for Dreamers is to pass DACA protections into law and do it now.” Gomez also quotes people like U.S. Federal Judge William Alsup, Michael Tan, and Andrew Pincus to support his claims against the decision to end DACA. Feuer, in spite of not including quotes from outside sources, provides straight legal information about the suits filed against the government’s repeal. Feuer’s credibility sources from the fact that he writes for the New York Times, and therefore, his writing and facts are also checked by multiple sources before it is published. However, his lack of quotes, makes his work less credible than that of Gomez.  

Through all the different opinions and perspectives on the end of DACA, the overall concern doesn’t change. The unreliability of DACA continues to negatively affect Dreamers’ daily lives, despite it not being completely evident. Whether its their feeling of security in their daily lives, or their ability to go to college and work, Dreamers are left being tossed back and forth between a sense of hope and a sense of helplessness. The sooner a decision is made, the more at ease Dreamers will feel, even if the program is fully rescinded.  Do they deserve a chance to work towards their dreams, or will all their hope be pulled away from right under them?Page Break 

Works Cited 

• Feuer, Alan. “Justice Department Seeks End of DACA Lawsuits.” New York Times, 28 Oct. 2017, p. A16(L). Gale Academic OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A511758283/AONE?u=cuny_ccny&sid=AONE&xid=dbc71311. Accessed 14 Sept. 2019. 
• Gardener, Jade, “Expecting the Inevitable: DACA and Mental Health” (2017). CUNY AcademicWorks. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gj_etds/245

• Gomez, Alan. “Court victory for DREAMers may prove short-lived.” USA Today, 11 Jan. 2018,  03A. Gale AcademicOneFile,https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A522650581/AONE?u=cuny_ccny&sid=AONE&xid=44165072. Accessed 11 Sept. 2019.
• Trump, Donald. (@realDonaldTrump) “DACA is dead because the Democrats didn’t care or act, and now everyone wants to get onto the DACA bandwagon… No longer works. Must build Wall and secure our borders with proper Border legislation. Democrats want No Borders, hence drugs and crime!” 02 April 2018, 4:17 AM. Tweet. 

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.