Introduction
Security is the priority of all the world’s countries, but sometimes, states use security as a tool against a certain group of people. In the US, the issue of security is currently correlated with DACA. DACA is Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, also known as Dreamers. These are the people who came to the US when they were children as illegal immigrants with their parents. Former President Obama created the DACA program (2012) to protect these people from deportation as the problem of Dreamers was contested in Congress for around a decade. (Congressional Research Service, 2025)
DACA Policy and Legal Status
DACA provides eligible recipients with a discretionary two-year deferral of removal that may be renewed, and recipients may obtain employment authorization if they demonstrate economic need; it does not grant citizenship or lawful immigration status. The September 2017 rescission did not result in the deportation of about 800,000 recipients in March 2018. Under the current court orders, USCIS may continue granting renewal requests on a case-by-case basis, while an injunction prevents the agency from granting initial DACA requests. The employment and revenue figures in the remainder of this article are 2017–2018 projections about a proposed termination and should be read in that historical context. (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2024)
Benefits of DACA for Recipients and Society
DACA helped dreamers whom their parents brought to have certain benefits. DACA program offered security from being deported from the US for being illegal in the US to the Dreamers. It also helped them gain work permits to practice or get a job with health insurance and education. It helped the people gain better jobs that improved their living conditions. It also helps the US economy as the people work and contribute to the higher tax revenues. A survey shows that 72 percent of the 25 Fortune 500 companies employ DACA beneficiaries. Moreover, a study claims that it has reduced mental illness among the children of the Dreamers by reducing the levels of stress that were caused by the legal status of their parents. Also, the mothers were able to get better healthcare for their children and themselves which is shown in their children who are the citizens of the US. The reduction in mental illness is due to DACA which implies that their parents will not be deported and they do not have to separate from their mothers. It provided security. Consequently, it improved the well-being of the recipients of DACA. (Associated Press, 2025)
Consequences of Repealing DACA
However, repealing DACA would cause many problems for the Dreamers or DACA recipients as it would uproot the people who have lived and adapted the culture so well. Also, they did not come here because they were willing. Their parents brought them here, so their legal status is their parent’s fault. Moreover, most of them are settled in the US and repealing would detach them from their, friends and schools which will cause them stress and create mental health problems. (The Guardian, 2025)
The Texas recipient counts and tax estimates in this paragraph were published during the 2017–2018 rescission debate. They should be identified as historical projections, not current recipient totals or tax collections. DACA remains available for qualifying renewals under current court orders, while initial requests cannot presently be granted, so any current Texas impact analysis requires newly dated USCIS and fiscal data.
Economic Impact on Texas and the United States
Although Texas will suffer economic losses if DACA is repealed, it does not have any law to support DACA at the state level. The country will decide the DACA recipients’ faith and Texas’s economic faith. Texas has the largest DACA recipient population, and it will be affected a great deal by the repeal of DACA. It will suffer more than most states with lesser populations. Consequently, it will lose highly educated and skilled workers who contribute to revenue generation and the state’s economic development. Therefore, it must have changed or made laws at the state level to prevent DACA repeal.
Additionally, the program recipients are well-skilled people with an increased participation rate and purchasing power. The DACA recipients contribute to the workforce with 83 percent of participation rates which is higher compared to all other males in the US as they have 79 percent participation rates. As they participate in the workforce, they have higher purchasing power. Around 65 percent of them have bought their first car and home. A total of 24 percent of DACA recipients are homeowners in the US. All these endeavors of the young people positively influence local and state revenues. Therefore, these people are not only beneficial for the state of Texas; they contribute to the economy of the US positively.
The $460.3 billion GDP estimate, business-ownership percentage and Medicare and Social Security contribution figure in this paragraph were projections produced during the 2017–2018 policy debate. They were estimates of possible effects under a proposed termination, not measured current losses. They should be dated and recalculated before being used in a present-day economic assessment.
Arguments for Repeal and Responses
Although many people realize the economic losses repeal of DACA has on the Economy of the US, the people who support repeal argue that DACA recipients steal jobs and are a threat to the security of the company. Although it appears to be a genuine concern, it is not true. In the case of DACA, it is not true because they are well-educated and skilled workers comparable to those who enter the US with highly skilled working visas. Moreover, most DACA recipients are getting an education and training, and after completion, they will be highly skilled to contribute to the US economy. They generate economic opportunities for the people by launching businesses in the country. Additionally, their skills meet the requirements of the jobs that they are taking. Hence, there is no evidence to support this claim.
The second argument is that they are a security threat to America. However, the DACA recipients are mostly educated, skilled workers with legitimate documentation. They do not fall into the category of illegal immigrants who many suspects are a security threat to a country. To be eligible for DACA, the person needs to meet certain criteria, which must be under 31 years of age as of 2012. The person must have come to the US when he was under 16 years, old and have lived in the US continuously. The person must also be enrolled in education and have obtained a GED. The person must not be convicted or pose any security threats to public safety. Hence, all of the information to assess a person is provided before a person receives the DACA status. Therefore, the arguments of these people being security threats are less likely.
Conclusion
To conclude, Texas will suffer serious economic losses if the DACA program is repealed because the DACA recipients are actively contributing to the economy and workforce of the state. Moreover, it will affect the US economy negatively. However, it will also have a negative impact on the Dreamers who have invested time, energy, and economic resources to be part of the US culture and society.
References
Congressional Research Service. (2025). Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals: Policy and Litigation Overview. Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48590
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2024). Frequently Asked Questions: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. USCIS. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-of-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-daca/frequently-asked-questions
Associated Press. (2025). Federal Government Could Resume Taking DACA Applications. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/5b9990853b3f391e9cbca24706d4edb6
The Guardian. (2025). DACA Recipients in Texas Await a Ruling That Could Upend Their Lives. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/01/daca-texas-ruling-immigration
Academic Master Education Team is a group of academic editors and subject specialists responsible for producing structured, research-backed essays across multiple disciplines. Each article is developed following Academic Master’s Editorial Policy and supported by credible academic references. The team ensures clarity, citation accuracy, and adherence to ethical academic writing standards
Content reviewed under Academic Master Editorial Policy.
