Her DACA Application Was Pending. Then a Federal Judge in Texas Ruled Against the Program.

“We get so close and then it’s taken away so easily.”

Karla Mercado Dorado (left) applied for DACA for the first time in December.Courtesy of Karla Mercado Dorado

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Karla Mercado Dorado left Bolivia when she was two years old, which means the United States is the only home she’s ever known. Growing up undocumented, she felt like she had to keep it a secret. “I didn’t know what would happen if I told someone, how they would react, and if anything would happen to me or to my family,” she said.

Dorado was eligible to apply for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which provides work authorization and temporary relief from deportation for undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children. But by the time she reached the required age, then President Donald Trump moved to end the Obama-era program.

After years of waiting, Dorado was finally able to apply for status last December, when a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to accept new applications. By June, as many as 81,000 undocumented youth had applied for DACA for the first time since the program reopened, but a growing backlog has left Dorado and thousands of prospective Dreamers in limbo—and vulnerable—again.

Last week, their hopes turned into disappointment after a Texas judge ruled against DACA and barred the federal government from granting initial requests, at least for the time being.

In a case brought by Texas and a coalition of Republican-led states challenging the legality of DACA, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen determined that the creation and operation of DACA was unlawful and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. The long-awaited decision doesn’t impact the more than 600,000 Dreamers who currently have status under DACA; it instructs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to continue to accept applications and requests for renewals. But it puts on hold the approval of new cases like Dorado’s.

“It was a huge blow,” she says. “I remember just getting really emotional thinking back to all of the plans that I had for for when I finally got DACA and all the hope that I felt getting the second opportunity and the effort that I put in when I was applying.” 

In June, as DACA turned 9 years old, I wrote about six first-time applicants who shared “how being undocumented runs deep.” They described feeling trapped because of their uncertain immigration status in the country, missing out on milestone experiences in high school, and having to jump through hoops to achieve their educational goals. For the lucky few who got approved before Judge Hanen’s decision came out, having DACA has offered a sense of relief and security, even if temporary. As Mexican-born Miranda Lovaas described to me:

I think I bawled for two hours straight when I was approved. I was excited, but also feeling survivor’s guilt. For so many people, it’s too late to make a difference for their lives, whether they’ve already been deported, whether they have died in this country while being undocumented, whether they would have been able to apply and gotten approved, but maybe they got arrested and now that hurts their chances.

It took me being 25 for this to happen. It makes me sad for the 16-year-old me who had to lie to her friends about why she couldn’t do this, why she couldn’t do that. It makes me sad for the 18-year-old me who was petrified at the thought of becoming an adult and still not having legal documents. I can’t tell you how many nights I stayed up as a kid just hoping that something would give before I became a legal adult, and of course it didn’t.

For countless others like Dorado, this latest setback feels like having something taken from them a second time. “I’m back to where I began the first time when I was eligible but it got ended before I could apply,” she says. “Back to square one.”

Although she rushed to submit her application in December, her biometrics appointment wasn’t scheduled until May due to delayed processing times. Now, Dorado adds, DHS is holding on to background information and $495 individual application fees from thousands of people like her. “We get so close and then it is taken away so easily. It’s even more frustrating seeing how just one person decides the future of so many people.”

But not all is lost. The Biden administration has indicated it will appeal the “deeply disappointing”—though hardly surprising in light of Judge Hanen’s background—ruling and the Department of Homeland Security is expected to issue a rule that would strengthen DACA in the near future. The president and Democratic legislators have also called on Congress to pass the American Dream and Promise Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for as many as 2.5 million undocumented immigrants, including Dreamers. The bill passed the House in March but stalled in the Senate.

“It is my fervent hope that through reconciliation or other means, Congress will finally provide security to all Dreamers, who have lived too long in fear,” Biden said in a statement following the adverse decision from the Texas court. During a CNN town hall this week, he emphasized that Dreamers should be able to stay in the United States. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats have released a $3.5 trillion reconciliation package including a provision that could provide a path to citizenship for Dreamers and other undocumented immigrants, by bypassing the filibuster. The proposal appears to have the support of Sen. Joe Manchin.

Immigrant rights advocates and Dreamers like Dorado say Judge Hanen’s decision only reinforces the need for a permanent solution. “This is not the first attack on DACA, it likely will not be the last,” she says. Dorado was looking forward to getting a job to help cover costs with college and support her parents. She was also hoping to visit family members in Bolivia of whom she has virtually no recollection. Perhaps more importantly, she wanted to have some reassurance that all the sacrifice and hard work hasn’t been in vain. “The whole thing has been waiting: waiting for the decision, for our applications, and now we’re waiting to see what happens next.” 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate