Category Archives: Voting and Democracy

Embracing the Great ‘Y’ALL’

Embracing the Great ‘Y’ALL’

Justice Demands a Future—and a Politics—That Includes Everyone

Mary J. Novak
August 8, 2024

Mary J. Novak is NETWORK’s Executive Director.

James Joyce famously described the Catholic Church as “Here comes everybody!” It’s a joyfully loud and messy image for a universal people of faith making their way through history toward the kin-dom of God. At World Youth Day in Portugal last year, Pope Francis echoed this sentiment when he described the church as being for “¡todos todos todos!” — “everyone, everyone, everyone!”

At NETWORK, we embrace this inclusive vision, not only for the church but for all of society. In our voter education efforts, for instance, we call on people to “Vote our Future” to embrace a vision of a future for everyone, where all people — no matter their race, country of origin, or socioeconomic background — have what they need to flourish and participate in our society.

While the beauty of Catholic Social Teaching provides a helpful light as we navigate toward a more just and equitable tomorrow, unfortunately, not all faith leaders devote their witness to promoting these values. The message many people receive in the pews is that they need to defend themselves against cultural “threats,” usually posed by greater acceptance of the LGBTQ+ community in our society.

Sadly, some politicians stand to gain from people of faith, believing they have to defend an exclusionary worldview, whether against the LGBTQ+ community or immigrants and other marginalized people, in order to be faithful. It amounts to a brazen bet that people will do the wrong thing if it benefits them.

But not all faith leaders allow themselves to be cynically co-opted. Pope Francis, for instance, made a powerful statement about the role of faith in a complex, changing world when, on December 18 of last year, he approved a blessing for same-sex couples. While many noted that this did not change Catholic teaching on marriage and sexuality, the point is that the pope modeled how to engage in affirmative acceptance and inclusion, rooted in human dignity, rather than treating human beings as threats.

This is especially urgent in the U.S., where the dominant position of the church has been to rebuff every legal protection for LGBTQ+ people as a threat to religious freedom. So much action on behalf of solidarity and the common good could be unleashed in the world if people of faith no longer feared for their identity or saw themselves as culturally under siege.

A group that understands this on a very deep level is young adults. While many have given up on the church because they see its teachings as endorsing intolerance, others have stayed and connected the dots of care for creation, care for immigrants, care for the whole human family, and the witness of faith. And so NETWORK, seeking to support and grow this energy, has engaged a cohort of college students this year to participate in our new Young Advocates Leadership Lab — or Y.A.L.L.

Like “Here comes everybody” and “¡todos todos todos!” Y.A.L.L. promotes an inclusive vision of faith at work in the public square. Y.A.L.L. leaders will engage in peer civic education on their campuses through activities such as voter registration drives and deep canvassing. These young leaders will also collaborate on NETWORK’s social media outreach to young Catholics. In an election year that has already proven so volatile, these young leaders are rays of hope for the future of U.S. democracy — and for the role of faith in preserving it.

Whether we worship in San Francisco, Detroit, or the Rio Grande Valley, Catholics have everything to lose if we silence our moral witness and buy into appeals to fear and scapegoating at the expense of solidarity and democracy.  The foundation of a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, pluralistic democratic society should be an appreciation for how all people are interconnected, with our well-being and fates intertwined. In this challenging moment in history, people of faith have an opportunity to draw on these values and build our society anew.

This story was published in the Quarter 3 2024 issue of Connection.
Allen v. Milligan is a Surprise Win for Voting Rights

Supreme Court Term Impacts Our Freedoms – PART 1

Supreme Court Term Impacts Our Freedoms - PART 1

JoAnn Goedert, Ignatian Volunteer Corp Member
Government Relations Special Contributor
August 2, 2023

Welcome to Part 1 of our two-part series! We’re diving into how the 2023-2024 Supreme Court term affects our freedoms, as they’re framed in NETWORK Advocates nonpartisan Equally Sacred Checklist. This part focuses on key decisions impacting democracy and government accountability. Don’t forget to check out Part 2 for more insights.

The 118th Congress is often—and appropriately– referred to as the “do-nothing Congress.” Earlier initiatives that advanced NETWORK’s Equally Sacred freedoms through Biden Administration-led legislation came to an abrupt halt in the current Congress by the GOP House of Representatives majority.

This deadlock in our Congress’s progress toward the realization of NETWORK’s vision is cause enough for concern.  But even more troubling is the fact that—despite the stalemate in the branch of government that is charged with making new laws– law is being made in insidious ways, as the conservative majority of the Supreme Court has stepped in to advance an ideological agenda at a stunning pace.

Over the last two years, the Court has undermined our Equally Sacred freedoms over and again, sometimes with the potential for long-term harm to our democracy and to the common good.  As we think about those precious freedoms, here are some key Court actions and their potential impact on the national well-being.

FREEDOM TO PARTICIPATE IN A VIBRANT DEMOCRACY

Without a court system that protects our basic democratic institutions, all of our other Equally Sacred freedoms are at risk.  For this reason, recent Court decisions promise to disrupt the basic workings of those institutions and aggrandize power to itself and its ideological compatriots.

Presidential Immunity: The most prominent of those decisions is, of course, Trump v. U.S., the Court’s declaration that a President is largely immune from prosecution for actions during their presidency that may be deemed “official.”  This decision will almost surely shield the prior President from legal accountability for many of his most troubling around the 2020 election.  But it also raises grave concerns over the conduct of future presidents who may no longer fear liability for stark abuses of power and actual crimes while in office.

Conspiracy to Obstruct Government Proceedings: In Fischer v. U.S., the Court held that a federal statute criminalizing conduct that obstructs or impedes an official proceeding applies only to cases where the defendant tampered with physical evidence related to the proceeding.  This decision raises doubt as to some of the crimes under which many January 6 insurrection participants were charged, potentially including some of the charges against Trump in his January 6 trial.

Agency Authority: In a severe blow to our nation’s constitutional institutions, the Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo swept away 40 years of precedent to diminish the authority of federal agency civil servants to interpret and enforce laws, giving power instead to federal judges and, ultimately, themselves.  The Court used a narrow fishing industry dispute to discard, across the federal government, the long-standing “Chevron” doctrine that provided civil servants with expertise in complex health, safety, environmental, and other matters deference to make “reasonable” interpretations of general statutes—and instead allowed federal judges to usurp that authority, despite having no specialized knowledge and no accountability other than the Supreme Court itself.

To compound its efforts to weaken federal agencies, the Court issued two additional decisions, SEC v. Jarkesy and Corner Post v. Federal Reserve, that promise to increase the courts’ power over agency authority. NETWORK now envisions widespread litigation in which individual judges issue ill-advised and inconsistent decisions that will disrupt badly needed environmental protections, efforts to reduce health care costs, safeguards for workers, food and housing assistance programs, and other federal rules that have long advanced the public good.

Voting Rights: This year, the Court also struck a blow to the constitutional protection of voting rights from racial discrimination.  In Alexander v. South Carolina Conference of the NAACP, the Court held that a South Carolina gerrymander scheme that marginalized Black voters was constitutionally acceptable under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.  The dismal rationale for their decision was based on their earlier holding that flagrant gerrymandering is constitutional if those in power argue that it was done for “partisan political” reasons.  In Alexander, the Court went further to allow it, even when the redistricting damaged Black voting rights.

This decision contrasts with an Alabama case last year, Merrill v. Milligan, in which the Court created some voting rights optimism when it overturned a similar gerrymander scheme under the Voting Rights Act.  This year the Court also overturned an appeals court decision upholding the Arkansas legislature’s redistricting plan that plaintiffs challenged as impermissible dilution of the Black vote in two Congressional districts (Simpson v. Thurston).  In Robinson v. Ardoin, the Court also blocked a lower court order in Louisiana to allow the implementation of a new redistricting plan that added a Black majority district in the 2024 election.  While both of these decisions are temporary, pending further proceedings, it is positive that the Voting Rights Act has at least survived challenges even in the current Court.

Spread of Social Media Disinformation:   Two cases before the Court this term, Moody v. Netchoice and Netchoice v. Paxton, challenged Texas and Florida laws that limit the ability of social media platforms to regulate political and journalistic content posted on their sites as violations of First Amendment freedom of speech. While the Court returned both cases to the lower courts for further proceedings, they barred their enforcement for now and, most likely, through the 2024 elections. Accordingly, social media platforms remain able in both states to remove political disinformation as needed to support an informed electorate.

 

That’s it for Part 1 of our series on the Supreme Court’s 2023-2024 term. Click here to read Part 2, in which we cover decisions affecting economic security, public safety, immigration, and environmental health. Be sure to read both parts for the full picture.

.

Allen v. Milligan is a Surprise Win for Voting Rights

Supreme Court Term Impacts Our Freedoms – PART 2

Supreme Court Term Impacts Our Freedoms - PART 2

JoAnn Goedert, Ignatian Volunteer Corp Member
Government Relations Special Contributor
August 6, 2023

Welcome to Part 2 of our two-part blog series! We’re continuing our look at the 2023-2024 Supreme Court term, focusing on decisions that impact economic security, public safety, immigration, and environmental health. If you missed it, check out Part 1 for our discussion on democracy-related decisions.

 

FREEDOM TO CARE FOR OURSELVES AND OUR FAMILIES

In the last two years, several Supreme Court decisions have undermined our ability to gain the economic security needed to care for ourselves and our families, in both dramatic and subtle ways.

Homelessness: Last month, the conservative Court majority tragically held in Grants Pass Oregon v. Johnson that local and state governments can effectively make being unhoused a crime.  Faced with a town ordinance that criminalized sleeping on city property, the Court majority refused to apply the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishment” to the arrest, fining, and jailing of the most vulnerable members of our society—even when no shelters or other options are available. We all must now fear for the safety and health of those who will be criminally punished simply because they lack shelter.

Student Debt: The Court’s conservative majority has also erected obstacles to our nation’s young people seeking to find their footing, with particular harm to Black, Brown, and other disadvantaged students.  Last year, the Court struck down the Biden-Harris administration’s plan to reduce the crushing burden of student debt on individuals who needed to borrow funds to pursue ever more costly higher education opportunities (Biden v. Nebraska).  This action deprived relief from up to 43 million individuals, especially those with low incomes.

Higher Education Diversity:  In 2023, the same Court majority also barred the consideration of race in higher education admissions decisions (Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard; Students for Fair Admission v. University of North Carolina), thwarting post-secondary educators’ efforts to provide for diversity in their student bodies. These decisions not only remove an important avenue of opportunity for Black and Brown young people, but they also have now unleashed a wave of litigation that threatens diversity initiatives nationwide in business, government funding and contracting, foundation grant-making, and other venues.

Employment Discrimination: On a rare positive note, the Court this Spring clarified the requirements of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for challenging employment discrimination based on race and other criteria.  In Muldrow v. Cit of St. Louis, the Court overturned an appellate court decision requiring that an employee must demonstrate “significant” disadvantage in an involuntary job transfer.  The Court held that that threshold was too high and that employees must only show “some harm” concerning employment discrimination.  The decision is important because it resolves a conflict among the lower courts nationwide on this issue, and it applies not just to job transfers but to all conditions of employment.

Wealth Tax: While many were expecting this Court to decide that a wealth tax is unconstitutional, it instead provided a reprieve.  The case of Moore v. U.S., which challenged the application of a narrow, one-time tax on foreign corporations, gave the Court an opening to decide the constitutionality of any tax on “unrealized gains” (i.e., gains in an individual’s wealth that are not cashed out, but instead reinvested or retained as assets), including the legality of a wealth tax.  While the Court found the tax at issue to be constitutional and did not reach the broader issues, there is language in the opinions that clearly questions the potential legality of any future wealth tax.

 

FREEDOM FROM HARM

Gun Possession: The 2022 Court decision in New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen recklessly insisted that any measure to protect us from gun violence had to be grounded in traditional laws passed centuries ago.  Confronted this year in U.S. v. Rahimi, a shocking case in which a repeat violent offender challenged his prohibition from possessing a gun while under a domestic violence protection order, the Court scrambled to reckon with its own logic to avoid an embarrassing decision and ultimately it allowed the prohibition to stand.

Bump Stocks: Still, just days earlier, the Court discarded regulations limiting dangerous “bump stock” gun attachments and the mass violence that these weapons can produce.  They relied on tortured reasoning, insisting that guns with bump stocks could not be regulated as automatic weapons because they did not meet one element of a statutory definition of “machine gun,” despite the fact that they function in every other respect as deadly automatic weapons.

Gun rights activists continue to challenge federal and state efforts to control gun violence in the courts. Thus, until the Court reverses its decision in Bruen, we can continue to expect more muddled, inconsistent decisions that will leave our schools, homes, and streets vulnerable to relentless gun violence.

 

FREEDOM TO LIVE IN A WELCOMING COUNTRY

Due Process Rights: Sadly, U.S. laws have long deprived immigrants of the basic due process rights that citizens take for granted.  Last month, the Court chipped away further at immigrant due process rights in two decisions.  In the first decision, Campos-Chaves v. Garland, a 5-4 Court majority ignored the clear language of federal immigration law and its own precedent to rule that the government’s Notice to Appear (NTA) at a noncitizen’s removal hearing must specify the time and date of the hearing.  In Campos-Chavez, the Court instead held that a deportation order can be enforced, even when the individual did not receive a valid NTA, but was informed of the date and time of their removal hearing in a separate document.

Immigrant Families: In Department of State v. Munoz, the Court held that neither an immigrant nor their spouse can challenge an immigration officer’s denial of a visa for the spouse in federal court. Five members of the 6-3 majority went on to suggest that the fundamental constitutional right to marry does not include a right to reside with one’s spouse, raising questions about the current conservative majority’s willingness to consider other limitations on the right to marry.

 

FREEDOM TO LIVE ON A HEALTHY PLANET

Water Quality and Flood Control: In the last two years, the Court has repeatedly aligned with large corporate polluters and climate deniers.  Its 2023 5-4 decision in Sackett v. EPA held that the EPA does not have any authority under the 1972 Clean Water Act to protect many of our nation’s long-regulated wetlands.  The decision threatens to puts water quality and flood control measures, including those already in place, at substantial risk across the nation.

Air Pollution: Last month, the Court temporarily forbade the EPA from enforcing its “Good Neighbor” regulations under the Clean Air Act.  These regulations require states whose emissions drift to a downwind state that then bears the brunt of the resulting pollution, to comply with EPA plans to lessen the excess pollution. In Ohio v. EPA and other consolidated cases, the Court referred the matter back to the lower courts for further deliberation, but not before barring the rules’ enforcement until all litigation is completed.  At that time, courts ominously will be free to overturn the EPA’s regulations under Loper Bright, and its elimination of any deference to the agency’s expertise.  

 

LOOKING AHEAD

Unlike our elected officials, the Supreme Court is largely unaccountable to the U.S. public whose laws it is supposed to protect.  And while the damage that the current Court has done and likely will continue to do has long-term consequences, we are not powerless to limit its reckless advancement of the conservative majority’s agenda.

Our elected officials can correct many of the Court’s most troubling mistakes if Congress has the will to work together to enact corrective legislation.  But many officials currently in Congress plainly lack that will. At NETWORK, we constantly advocate for laws that continue to protect our freedoms, even in the face of a Court majority that does not share our values.  As multi-issue voters who care about our communities and our Equally Sacred freedoms, together we will keep the current Court majority’s recklessness in check and make our voices heard in 2024 and beyond.

 

That’s a wrap for Part 2 of our blog series on the 2023-2024 Supreme Court term and our Equally Sacred freedoms. Thanks for reading both parts to get the full story on these important decisions.

LGBTQIA+ Inclusion is a Christian Value

LGBTQIA+ Inclusion is a Christian Value  

Virginia Schilder, MDiv, ThM and Minister Christian S. Watkins, MDiv
July 28, 2024

Honor Pride Month by making a plan to vote for a future where everyone thrives—no exceptions!  https://networkadvocates.org/ 

No matter who we love, how we express ourselves, or what our family looks like, we all want and deserve to be safe, protected, and valued for who we are. This is one of our deepest human longings!  Accordingly, the Catholic Church insists that every single person has immeasurable worth and dignity, and therefore must be respected, protected, and cherished as children of God.  

However, some people in our politics assert the extremist position that only some people and families deserve rights and protection.  

In the past year alone, state legislatures introduced a record number of bills targeting LGBTQIA+ people, parents, and children. These bills are hostile and divisive, and are linked to the rising rates of violence against queer and trans people, including youth. These policies make our communities unsafe and hostile for everyone, not just for those targeted by the laws. They create a culture of condemnation, censorship, and forced conformity, rather than nurturing a culture of welcome, inclusivity, and compassion.  They defensively close the door to connection, inclusive community, and understanding.  

Our freedom to live in safety is threatened by political and religious leaders who paint us or our fellow community members—our siblings, friends, parents, children, neighbors, and coworkers — as “threats.” All too often, these political actors try to pit us against each other, hoping that we become too preoccupied with fear and hysteria to notice when they try to line their own pockets and force cuts to our health care, housing, and food assistance programs — as some right-wing members of Congress tried to do in 2023.  

But we know better than to fall for scapegoating. As Christians, we refuse to make God smaller! We know each other, and we know our actual Christian values: to love, protect, and be in solidarity with our neighbors. We know that God’s creation is diverse and beautiful, and that every single person is fearfully and wonderfully made in the image and likeness of God – absolutely no exceptions!  

Today, public opinion in the U.S. overwhelmingly supports same-sex marriage.  Moreover, new research from PRRI shows that Americans perceive discrimination against transgender individuals as being the highest of any group right now.  We see the hatred that’s going on, and it does not reflect our values, nor our dreams for ourselves and our children. 

Our communities have protected one another and our families before, by rejecting hatred and division and supporting policies that promote true safety and freedom for all of us. For example, last year, the Biden administration launched a new LGBTQI+ Community Safety Partnership to provide safety trainings, support health care workers, promote the reporting of hate crimes, and build partnerships to address hate-fueled violence. These initiatives, and the spirit of solidarity they foster, make our communities better for everyone. 

We can continue to take action to reflect our true values: inclusivity, freedom, and love for our neighbors. Together, we have power to make sure no one in our communities is excluded, demonized, and stripped of their freedoms. We have the power to insist on our equal worth and equal rights to protection, including for our children. This election year and beyond, we can Vote Our Future to ensure that every single one of us has the freedom to live in safety, and to be who God made us to be.  

Honor Pride Month by making a plan to vote for a future where everyone thrives—no exceptions!  https://networkadvocates.org/ 

A Future for Freedom

A Future for Freedom

We Must Never Stop Dreaming of a Better World

Joan F. Neal
June 17, 2024
Joan F. Neal, Deputy Executive Director and Chief Equity Officer at NETWORK

Joan F. Neal, Deputy Executive Director and Chief Equity Officer at NETWORK

It’s usually dangerous to look back on previous eras of history as somehow better. Nostalgia too often masks racism and other egregious injustices more widely accepted in times past. However, one positive hallmark of some recent past decades is people’s capacity to dream.

Past generations had a lot to say about the American dream; they embraced the concept of all people having the ability within their grasp to make the life they wanted for themselves. In the fight against slavery, Jim Crow, and second-class citizenship, most Black Americans embraced Dr. King’s dream of the Beloved Community where all are free and equal. Dreams push us toward action, because they imbue the lives of those who have them with hope.

We all want to live lives of hope, lives oriented toward having what we need to flourish and find fulfillment. The word for that is freedom, true freedom.

Unfortunately, due to circumstances beyond their control, today’s younger generations do not feel the hope to dream. Millennials and Gen Zers have had their adulthoods defined by financial crises, spiraling economic inequality, and an unrelenting experience of being priced out of American success and the freedoms that only democracy conveys, ones that their parents and grandparents took for granted. This is no accident. This is the result of 40 years of deliberate public policy choices that divested from families and communities and directed greater and greater wealth into the hands of fewer and fewer extremely rich individuals.

Pope Francis has described this phenomenon as young people feeling “crushed by the present,” unable to dream of a better future. Young people without hope should be a warning to us all that our ability to experience or exercise freedom is in danger. When people lose faith in a system’s ability to deliver for them, the system is in jeopardy. Is it any surprise then that the world has witnessed a global decline in democracy for the past 17 years?

We cannot afford for freedom to be relegated to the history books as a curious anomaly of the late second millennium. No, it is in the best interest of all people on the planet for there to be a future for freedom. For a picture of what the alternative offers, we can look to a country like Russia where the corrupt rule of a few oligarchs violently suppresses its opposition, leaves its own people without hope, and brutally attacks the freedom of its neighbor, Ukraine. But we can also look to the oppressive structures we permit in our own politics — such as inaction on immigration reform or refusing to make the tax code more equitable — that also robs people of freedom and their future.

See NETWORK’s 2024 Equally Sacred Checklist, to support you in educating yourself as a faithful voter on the “equally sacred” freedoms at stake in this election and beyond.

Catholic Social Teaching talks a great deal about freedom. It really matters. If a person lacks freedom, then they do not have what they need to make a true moral choice, including the choice to live into the potential and the dream that God has for every one of us to thrive, no exceptions!

At NETWORK, we see the brokenness of our public policies as structures of sin, that destroy people’s freedom and the common good. That is why, this year, NETWORK is focusing our election priorities on six freedoms:

  • Freedom to be Healthy
  • Freedom to Care for Ourselves and Our Families
  • Freedom to Live on a Healthy Planet
  • Freedom from Harm
  • Freedom to Participate in a Vibrant Democracy
  • and Freedom to Live in a Welcoming Country that Values Dignity and Human Rights.

You can read more about these later in this issue of Connection. Whether it’s health care, immigration, climate change, or one’s economic situation, we see this year in terms of the human freedoms at stake. We must ensure that these freedoms are reverenced and more deeply enshrined in our politics and our public policies, so that future generations experience the freedom to dream.

This story was published in the Quarter 2 2024 issue of Connection.

Dreams of Inclusion

Dreams of Inclusion

Inaction by Congress Costs DACA Recipients the Ability to Participate Fully in a Democracy They Help Make Flourish

Sydney Clark
June 11, 2024

Ivonne Ramirez speaks about her experiences as a child immigrant and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program participant during Mass at Mary Mother of the Church Parish in St. Louis. Photo: Sid Hastings

Ivonne Ramirez was 8 when her family migrated to the U.S. from Mexico City. They arrived in St. Louis, Missouri, where her father and a sibling had been living for about a year.

“It took seven days to get to St. Louis,” Ramirez says. “I was mostly walking to cross the border. It took a lot out of me.” Her father, a police officer, left Mexico due to safety concerns after raiding a money-laundering operation inside a bar. He was only able to bring one of his children. Ramirez journeyed with her mother and three other siblings.

“I was sleep-deprived, and people kept telling me, ‘If you keep going, you’re gonna see your dad’,” she says. “Not seeing my father for a year felt like a lifetime.”

A few years after the family reunited, Ramirez became eligible for the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program, which began in 2012 as an executive action by President Barack Obama. This year marks a decade for Ramirez as a recipient.

She and her family still resides in St. Louis. She works full-time doing quality control for a medical equipment company. On weekends, she serves as a catechist at Our Lady of Guadalupe Parish in Ferguson, Missouri. “It feels like home. I’ve been here for most of my life,” Ramirez says.

Shut Out

While DACA has allowed Ramirez to attend school and get a driver’s license and a work permit, the realities of being a recipient remain at the forefront. She is one of roughly 580,000 active DACA recipients.

“Our permits and status allow us to be here for two years, and then we have to renew six months before,” she says. “This year, I’m OK, but next year, I have to start thinking about sending all the paperwork and the fee, which is $495. How will I get that extra income to pay for that?”

Recipients are ineligible to vote in federal elections, and Ramirez’s voting rights are nonexistent. Some states and municipalities allow noncitizens to vote in local elections like city councils, mayoral and school boards. Missouri is not one of them.

“If you pay your taxes, contribute to society, and show that you’re a model citizen, I don’t see why the efforts to put something permanent for [us] aren’t there,” Ramirez says.

In 2022, NETWORK honored Ramirez as one the organizations’ inaugural “Social Poets,” young justice-seekers whose lives and work define the challenges and possibilities of the coming decades. Unfortunately, permanent legal status for undocumented people in the U.S. remains an unaddressed challenge.

Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, deputy directory of federal advocacy at United We Dream and a DACA recipient. Photo: Diana Alvarez

At its height, DACA had around 840,000 recipients, says Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, deputy director of federal advocacy at United We Dream, the largest immigrant youth-led network in the country. A DACA recipient herself, she was 14 when her family migrated to the U.S. from Brazil. Macedo do Nascimento calls DACA the largest “victory of the immigration movement in decades.”

The program, however, has faced ongoing legal battles since its origin, leaving recipients in constant limbo.

“Many don’t know how much danger the policy is in,” Macedo do Nascimento says. The latest challenge happened on Sept. 13 of last year, when Texas federal judge Andrew Hanen ruled again that DACA is unlawful. Now, DACA will likely revisit the Supreme Court in 2025.

Although Hanen blocked new program applications, he left DACA unchanged for existing recipients during the anticipated appeals process. Recipients can continue to renew and apply for Advance Parole, which allows certain immigrants to leave the U.S. and return lawfully, said Macedo do Nascimento.

Bruna Bouhid, senior communications and political director at United We Dream, at a UWD Congress in Miami. Photo: United We Dream

“You feel like you’re on a roller coaster,” says Bruna Bouhid, senior communications and political director at United We Dream. “You never know if this will be your last chance to apply or if, in a year or six months, you will lose all those things you had planned for or worked hard to get.”

Bouhid, who became a recipient at 20, says the legal fights reveal that DACA will “not be our saving grace. We need something permanent. We need citizenship.”

Government Inaction

“It’s really up to Congress to find and support the solution,” says Christian Penichet-Paul, assistant vice president of policy and advocacy at the National Immigration Forum. “It’s the only branch of government that can ensure DACA recipients and other young DREAMers can stay in America long term and potentially become lawful permanent residents.”

Penichet-Paul says distrust among both parties and lack of courage helped derail legislative action and execution. He also predicts immigration reform talks in Congress will not advance during this election year.

“Democracy is such a precious thing, and it can take a long time to come up with a compromise,” Penichet-Paul says. “Sometimes, getting to the right place requires multiple little steps.”

As to when a policy window might open up, he notes, “It’s always said that Congress works best on a deadline. Unfortunately, that might be the next Supreme Court decision.”

Penichet-Paul stresses that there is bipartisan agreement and existing text that can serve as the bill that “finally provides permanence for young DREAMers who’ve been in America since they were little kids.”

One option could be a new version of the DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) Act, first introduced in 2001. A version introduced last year by Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) would permit noncitizens brought to the U.S. as children to earn permanent residence aft¬er meeting specific education or work requirements. Durbin and Graham introduced similar legislation in the last three sessions of Congress.

Ivonne Ramirez speaks to parishioners at Mary Mother of the Church Parish in St. Louis. Ramirez, one of NETWORK’s “Social Poets,” has been a DACA recipient for the past decade. Photo: Sid Hastings

Additionally, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA) introduced the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2023, which would tackle the sources of migration, reform the visa system, and “responsibly manage the southern border.”

“We can have a pragmatic system, looking at who needs and wants to migrate, but let’s create a system that is fair and humane for everyone,” Bouhid says.

Ramirez admits that she’s “a little scared” for the looming 2024 election but encourages those eligible in her community to vote.

“A lot of Americans know at least one, if not many, DACA recipients and immigrants,” she says. “If you get to know them and understand why they came to the U.S., you would happily vote in honor of them.”

Ramirez says her Catholic faith inspires her to be vocal about the challenges immigrants face.

“I never want to stop talking about us and why we need to become citizens,” she says.

Penichet-Paul says immigrants have grown up as “American as any U.S. citizen in many ways” and take civic participation and community service seriously.

“Immigrants are often some of our strongest allies in maintaining democracy and the institutions that allow our democracy to prosper,” Penichet-Paul adds. “Democracy can coexist with DACA and immigration. They’re about good governance and ensuring that people can reach their full potential, nothing more, nothing less.”

Sydney Clark is a New Orleans native and multimedia producer based in Washington, D.C.

This story was published in the Quarter 2 2024 issue of Connection.

Equally Sacred Multi-issue Voter Checklist

Equally Sacred Multi-issue Voter Checklist

Download and share the multi-issue voter Equally Sacred Checklist in English, large print English, and Spanish

Multi-issue Voters Vote Our Future, So Everyone Thrives. No Exceptions!

How can we know we are voting for candidates who promote the common good? Pope Francis makes it clear: Catholics and all people of good will are called to be multi-issue voters, not single-issue voters, in the 2024 elections and in our continued participation in public life. This resource can support you in educating yourself as a faithful voter on the issues and concerns that are “equally sacred.”

“We cannot uphold an ideal of holiness that would ignore injustice in the world.” —Pope Francis, Gaudete et exsultate, par. 101

Equally sacred checklist for multi-issue voters in English
English
English, large print

Multi-issue Voters Vote Our Future, so Everyone Thrives. No Exceptions!

¿Cómo podemos saber que estamos votando por candidatos que promueven el bien común? El Papa Francisco lo deja claro: los católicos y todas las personas de buena voluntad están llamados a ser votantes de múltiples temas, no votantes de un solo tema, en las elecciones de 2024 y en nuestra participación continua en la vida pública. Este recurso puede ayudarlo a educarse como un votante fiel sobre temas e inquietudes que son “igualmente sagrados”.

“No podemos defender un ideal de santidad que ignore la injusticia en el mundo.” —Papa Francisco, Gaudete et exsultate, párr. 101

Equally Sacred Checklist for Download
Lista de verificación para votantes de múltiples temas igualmente sagrados en Español