Inland Empire residents at higher risk of having DACA revoked by Feds, lawsuit says

Jose Eduardo Gil Robles of Minnesota was arrested for driving without a license in September.

He came to the United States from Mexico without authorization when he was five years old, but had Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which meant the government considered him to be lawfully present in the country. His misdemeanor charge, which is still pending, normally would not have disqualified him from DACA, yet about one month after his arrest, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement notified him it was placing him in deportation proceedings.

In November, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services terminated his DACA status and work permit with no notice, giving him no opportunity to respond, according to a class action lawsuit filed by the ACLU in California's U.S. District Court Central District in December, on behalf of Gil, two other DACA recipients and the Inland Empire Immigrant Youth Collective.

"I just can't believe this can happen, just for the smallest thing," Gil said.

Across the country, the ACLU alleges, DACA recipients are being stripped of their benefits based on unsubstantiated allegations and minor criminal charges. The suit accuses the U.S. Department of Homeland Security of violating people's constitutional right to due process by terminating their DACA without giving them notice or an opportunity to respond.

And in Southern California’s Inland Empire, which has a heavy Customs and Border Protection presence, DACA recipients are at heightened risk of encountering immigration officials and losing their status, it says.

The suit asks a U.S. District Court judge to certify the class, declare the federal government’s revocation practices unlawful and prohibit the government from rescinding DACA grants and work authorization based on these practices in the future. It also asks the court to stop the revocation of the plaintiffs' DACA grants and order the government to accept renewal applications from the plaintiffs and other class members.

Homeland Security said it cannot comment on pending litigation.

MORE: As Trump calls for border security, Coachella Valley youth vow to keep fighting for DACA

The revocation practices are an extra threat to a group of young people whose fate is already uncertain. The Trump Administration announced in September that it was ending the DACA program and giving Congress six months to adopt the provisions into law. On Jan. 9, a federal judge in San Francisco temporarily blocked that plan from proceeding.

As Congress debates a permanent solution for nearly 700,000 DACA recipients, at least 17 have had their status unexpectedly revoked, according to the ACLU. Some, like Gil, were supporting their families. Now they're unable to legally work and are uncertain about their future in this country.

"It makes things precarious," said ACLU staff attorney Katrina Eiland. "Even if you comply with all the rules, and you don't do anything that would make you ineligible for DACA, you could have DACA stripped away with no process and end up with nothing in the end."

That risk is intensified in the Inland Empire, Eiland said. There are three Customs and Border Protection sub-stations in Riverside County – in Indio, Murrieta and Temecula – and a new border patrol complex is under construction in the Moreno Valley, the suit says. There are also border patrol checkpoints across the county and roving patrols are common in the area.

"This case is important to us because we have youth who could be potentially at risk of going through the same situation," said Alondra Naves, who serves as outreach coordinator for plaintiff Inland Empire – Immigrant Youth Collective. At least 18 of the group’s 28 active members have DACA, the suit says.

Naves, who grew up mainly in Fontana, recalls rarely traveling south of central Riverside, for fear she and her family members would be stopped and held by immigration agents. Naves now has DACA, but says that concern has only intensified in the past year.

"It is a constant fear that our community has – especially now, under the new administration," she said.

Irrational and arbitrary?

People qualified for DACA benefits if they came to the country before age 16 and were in school, a high school graduate, or an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces. They had to reapply for benefits every two years.

Those who got deferred action were authorized by Homeland Security to be present in the country and were considered "lawfully present" during the period it was in effect, according to the agency. They were also eligible for work authorization.

Gil got DACA in 2015. Most recently, he worked for a logistics company, delivering furniture and appliances to homes and businesses in the Minneapolis area. That allowed him to pay half his family’s rent and utilities bills, he said

In September, a police officer pulled him over and told him his driver's license had been cancelled, the suit says. Under Minnesota law, DACA recipients must prove their temporary status has been extended or changed, or their license will be cancelled. Gil had recently renewed his two-year DACA grant, but didn't know there was a problem with his license, the suit says.

He was arrested and released from jail the next day, the suit says. But about a month later, ICE agents appeared at his workplace and detained him, it says. ICE issued him a Notice to Appear, saying it was initiating deportation proceedings because he was in the country without permission.

He spent about a month and a half in detention before he was released on bond. His next court date is slated for August 2019.

Upon his release in November, he learned Citizenship and Immigration Services had terminated his DACA and work permit. Now that he can't work, he said he's helping around the house, spending time with his five younger siblings, and boxing and drawing to keep his mind busy.

MORE: A court with no judges finally got new ones. Now these immigrants might get deported

Gil's experience highlights a problem with Homeland Security's practices, the suit alleges. It claims the government is breaking its own rules governing how it can revoke people's DACA.

For example, the suit says the agency is revoking DACA for criminal allegations – like minor traffic offenses – that are not serious enough to disqualify people from the program. Individuals do not qualify for DACA if they've been convicted of a felony, a significant misdemeanor, or three or more misdemeanors, or pose a threat to national security or public safety, according to Citizenship and Immigration Services.

It also alleges the agency is immediately canceling DACA anytime the agency initiates deportation proceedings by issuing a Notice to Appear. That goes against the program's own rules, which require a detailed set of procedures be followed before the agency terminates a DACA grant, including, in most cases, notification and an opportunity to respond, it says.

Sometimes, like in Gil's case, the Notice to Appear is issued because the person is in the country without permission – which, the suit says, should not be grounds for termination.

Homeland Security's "practice of terminating DACA based on [a Notice to Appear] charging presence without admission or overstaying a visa is irrational and arbitrary because all DACA recipients are present in the country without lawful immigration status; indeed, that circumstance is what made it necessary for them to apply for DACA in the first place," the suit says.

These practices are part of the Trump Administration's efforts to gradually chip away at the DACA program, charges Eiland of the ACLU.

"It seems like they're looking for any reason to terminate DACA," she said. "We think they're not treating DACA recipients fairly."

'It was everything'

In fact, the federal District Court has already ruled on this matter for one of the plaintiffs, Jesus Alonso Arreola Robles of Los Angeles. In November, the court sided with Arreola and the ACLU and granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting Homeland Security from revoking Arreola’s DACA status and work authorization.

Arreola, who came to the U.S. with his parents when he was one year old, got DACA in 2012. It allowed him to cook at a prestigious restaurant in West Hollywood and drive for Uber and Lyft.

He was arrested in February on suspicion of human smuggling, the suit says.

A friend had offered Arreola $600 to drive his cousin from the L.A. area to the San Diego area to pick up the friend's cousin and uncle and bring them back to L.A. When he and the customer reached their destination, the customer exited the car and approached someone in the dark, who he apparently thought was his uncle, the suit says.

But the individual wasn't his uncle, it was a Customs and Border Protection agent. The agent arrested the customer and Arreola, apparently suspecting he was aiding in smuggling people into the country, the suit says.

Arreola was taken into detention. A day after his arrest, Customs and Border Protection initiated deportation proceedings by issuing him a Notice to Appear, charging him with being in the country without admission, the suit says.

He was never charged with any smuggling-related crime, the suit says.

He remained in detention for three weeks. At a bond hearing in March, an immigration judge rejected ICE's arguments that Arreola was involved in smuggling, the suit says.

Three days after Arreola posted bond and was released, he received notification that Citizenship and Immigration Services had terminated his DACA and work authorization, the suit says. He didn't have an opportunity to respond or contest the decision, it says.

"It's messed up," Arreola said. Without DACA, he was unable to help his family with the rent and bills or save money for the child he and his girlfriend were expecting.

"They're not giving people chances and are just taking everything away from them," he said.

The District Court agreed. It found the agency's automatic termination of Arreola’s DACA, based on the filing of a Notice to Appear charging him with being present in the country without permission, violated federal law, the suit says. The court also found the agency's failure to provide Arreola with notice and an opportunity to respond to its termination decision violated the rules of the DACA program, it says.

Eiland of the ACLU said she's hopeful the court will extend those findings to Gil and other members of the class, preventing the government from terminating DACA unlawfully and providing a solution for those who have already lost their status.

"It shows that he was receptive to the claims and understood the claims we were bringing," Eiland said. "We're hopeful that means he'll be open to ruling on them and issuing a class-wide injunction.”

The same day the court issued its ruling reinstating his DACA and work authorization, Arreola’s girlfriend gave birth to their first child, Moses Alonso. He soon returned to his job at the restaurant.

But the good news was short-lived: In December, Homeland Security issued him another notice, informing him ICE considers him an "enforcement priority" and is "actively pursuing your removal in immigration court," the suit says.

Arreola now finds himself back in limbo, his fate in the government's hands.

"To them, it's just a little license," he said. "To me, it was everything."

Rebecca Plevin covers immigration and equality for The Desert Sun. Contact her at rebecca.plevin@desertsun.com or @rebeccaplevin on Twitter.