In other words, DACA is protected (again) for now, regardless of whether the Supreme Court decides to hear the Trump administration's appeal of the first federal ruling out of California.
Fernandez added that while both decisions reinforce that the DACAmentados may continue to be so for the moment, "we need a permanent and legislative solution".
"The federal government took the unusual step of seeking an immediate appeal to the supreme court and this Friday we will know if it accepts it or not", said the lawyer. The move gave Congress a March 5 deadline to create a legislative replacement for the program, but was nearly immediately challenged in court.
Garaufis, however, said the government was "erroneous" in its conclusion that DACA was unconstitutional and that it violated the Administrative Procedures and Immigration and Nationality acts.
"If there's no deal by the end of the week then that, I think, leaves the DACA recipients in some jeopardy", Senate Republican John Cornyn said. Chuck Grassley and others that includes the President's proposal to grant a pathway to citizenship to the young undocumented immigrants who came to the USA as children who were covered by DACA, but also includes upwards of $25 billion for border security, hardline immigration enforcement and substantial cuts to legal immigration - the latter part of which has been uniformly opposed by Democrats and some Republicans.
"The court is not pleased", the judge wrote in a footnote. They do not require DHS to accept applications from people who have never been protected by DACA.
Interest has, apparently, been strong even before the latest ruling.
"This isn't ordinary", Judge Garaufis said.
CHIRLA is helping incentivize applicants by offering to pay the $495 USCIS renewal fee. "We would love to get it done", Trump said.
Several East Coast organizations contacted by The Washington Times did not respond to messages about how their sign-ups were going.