DACA was approved on June 15, 2012, when Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano signed a memorandum creating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services began accepting applications two months later, on August 15, 2012.1Department of Homeland Security. Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children Congress never voted on it. President Obama announced the policy the same day Napolitano issued the memo, but the founding document is the memo itself: a policy directive from a cabinet secretary, not a law and not an executive order.
Why It Was Created by Memo Instead of Law
DACA exists because Congress spent more than a decade unable to pass the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act. The DREAM Act was first introduced in the Senate in 2001 as S.1291, and some version of it came back nearly every year after.2Congress.gov. S.1291 – 107th Congress (2001-2002): DREAM Act It attracted bipartisan sponsors and cleared committee votes, but never made it through both chambers.
The closest attempt was December 2010. The bill passed the House but fell five votes short of the 60 needed to break a Senate filibuster. By 2012, with legislation stalled and hundreds of thousands of young people who had grown up in the United States still without any legal status, the political pressure for an executive-branch response had built up. The Napolitano memo was the response.
The mechanism it used is called prosecutorial discretion: the government’s authority to decide which cases to pursue and which to set aside. Immigration officials had always exercised that discretion case by case. What the memo did was make it systematic, creating a formal process for an entire category of people to request protection from deportation. The memo was explicit that DACA “confers no substantive right, immigration status or pathway to citizenship,” and that only Congress could grant those things.1Department of Homeland Security. Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children Approved recipients would receive deferred action for two years, renewable, along with eligibility for a work permit.
What the June 15, 2012 Date Locked In
The eligibility rules the memo set out were tied directly to that announcement date, and they have never changed. An applicant had to be under 31 on June 15, 2012 (born on or after June 16, 1981), had to have arrived in the United States before turning 16, and had to have lived here continuously since June 15, 2007, and been physically present on June 15, 2012.3U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) – Frequently Asked Questions Applicants also needed to be in school, have a diploma or GED, or be an honorably discharged veteran, and could not have a disqualifying criminal record.
Because the age and residence cutoffs are fixed to June 15, 2012, the pool of people who could ever qualify was set on the day the policy was signed. Someone born after June 15, 1981, or who arrived in the United States after turning 16, cannot become eligible no matter how long the program continues.
When Applications Opened
USCIS needed two months to build the intake system. The agency began accepting applications on August 15, 2012.4The White House – President Barack Obama. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals: Who Can Be Considered? Applicants filed Form I-821D (the DACA request) alongside Form I-765 (the work permit application), with evidence of identity, age, continuous residence, and education. The initial filing fee was $465, which covered both forms and biometric services.5U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Approval brought a two-year grant of deferred action and a work permit, which in turn made recipients eligible for a Social Security number and, in most states, a driver’s license.
The 2017 Rescission and the Supreme Court
On September 5, 2017, the Trump administration announced it would end DACA.6U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals 2017 Announcement Then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions argued the program was an unconstitutional exercise of executive power, and DHS ordered a wind-down: no new initial applications would be accepted, and recipients whose status expired between September 5, 2017 and March 5, 2018 had until October 5, 2017 to file a final renewal. After that, DACA would fade out as existing grants expired.
Federal courts in California, New York, and the District of Columbia blocked the rescission within months, ordering USCIS to keep processing renewals while the cases moved forward. On June 18, 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California that the rescission was “arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedure Act.7Supreme Court of the United States. Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion. The Court did not hold that DACA itself was lawful or that the executive branch lacked authority to end it. It held only that the administration had not followed the proper process. USCIS then fully restored the program, including new initial applications, for the first time since 2017. That opening did not last.
The Final Rule and the Texas Injunction
In August 2022, DHS published a final rule that put DACA into federal regulation rather than resting the program on the 2012 memo alone.8Federal Register. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals The rule went through public notice and comment and took effect on October 31, 2022. Its substance mostly matched the original policy, but the regulatory form was meant to give DACA firmer legal ground after the Supreme Court’s criticism of the rescission process.
The Southern District of Texas rejected that approach. Judge Andrew Hanen had already ruled in July 2021 that the original memo was unlawful, entering an injunction that blocked new initial DACA grants while allowing renewals to continue. In September 2023, he extended that injunction to the new final rule, finding “no material differences” between the regulation and the memo it replaced.9U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. DACA Litigation Information and Frequently Asked Questions
On January 17, 2025, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals largely affirmed Judge Hanen’s ruling that the DACA final rule is unlawful. The appeals court did narrow the remedy, limiting the injunction to Texas rather than applying it nationwide.10United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Texas v. United States, No. 23-40653 Even so, USCIS has continued to treat the order as blocking all new initial grants. The case is still active, with additional briefing requested at the district court as recently as July 2025.11Congress.gov. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA): Litigation Status
Where DACA Stands Now
DACA still protects roughly 525,000 people, but only those who already had it. USCIS is not processing new initial applications, so someone who has never held DACA cannot obtain it, even if they meet every original criterion.9U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. DACA Litigation Information and Frequently Asked Questions Pending initial requests are on hold. Existing grants and their work permits remain valid until they expire.
Renewals continue. USCIS advises filing between 150 and 120 days before a current grant expires and reports adjudicating most renewals within 120 days.12U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. I-821D, Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals The original $465 fee no longer applies; current amounts depend on whether the application is filed online or by mail, and no fee waiver is available.
Legislation to give this group permanent status keeps returning. The Dream Act of 2025 was introduced in the Senate as S.3348 in the 119th Congress.13Congress.gov. S.3348 – 119th Congress (2025-2026): Dream Act of 2025 Like every version before it, it would create a path to permanent residency for people brought to the United States as children. Until Congress passes something, DACA remains what it was on June 15, 2012: an administrative policy, protecting the same fixed group of people, subject to the next court order or the next administration.