This November, the United States Supreme Court is set to hear
oral arguments on the case that will decide the fate of the
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.1 This program, established through
executive action, has offered a temporary reprieve from removal
(deportation) to nearly 800,000 students and young professionals
raised in the United States.2 While the program protects
a generation categorically denied opportunity to gain legal
status,3 it is very limited in scope.
Remarkably, DACA does not confer any immigration status itself nor
offer a separate pathway to any other status including permanent
residency.4
The idea that someone can be present in the United States
without legal status while not unlawfully present is confusing
– not only to the general public, but apparently to the
Supreme Court. In oral argument for U.S. v. Texas, Chief
Justice John Roberts wondered, "I'm sorry, that just so I
get that right... Lawfully present does not mean