Bennet, Congressional Democrats Press Todd Blanche on Decision to Weaken Legal Protections for DACA Recipients

Jun 16, 2026 | Press Releases

Denver- Colorado U.S. Senator Michael Bennet joined Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) as well as U.S. Representatives Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) and Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) in leading over 50 colleagues to press Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)'s recent decision to weaken legal protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients.

In a letter to Blanche, the lawmakers raise legal concerns with the decision, highlighting inconsistencies between BIA's ruling and the forbearance protections provided by DACA and upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

"We are troubled to see the Board, and by extension, the Department of Justice, attempt to circumvent legal protections for DACA recipients, which have been codified in regulation by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and affirmed in a recent decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. We urge you to take steps within your authority as Attorney General to ensure the Board's rulings regarding DACA are interpreted in a manner consistent with current law," wrote the lawmakers.

"DACA is well established as a 'a form of enforcement discretion not to pursue . . . removal.' As the Board noted in its decision, a DACA recipient 'cannot be removed from the United States while she has DACA protection.' DHS established DACA in 2012 by memorandum, and codified it in regulation in 2022 … By regulation, immigration judges may, in the exercise of discretion, terminate removal proceedings for individuals who have received grants of deferred action," continued the lawmakers.

"The Fifth Circuit also maintained the nationwide stay for current DACA recipients, acknowledging the 'immense reliance interests' of current DACA recipients and the potential for significant disruption to others reliant on the program. Most important, in its decision, the Fifth Circuit stated that it would 'not disturb DACA's policy of forbearance.' DACA's policy of forbearance, as explained in the DACA regulation, 'is a form of enforcement discretion not to pursue the removal of certain aliens[.]' (emphasis added)," explained the lawmakers.

"By concluding in Matter of Santiago-Santiago that an immigration judge may not terminate removal proceedings based solely on the fact that the respondent has been granted DACA, the Board acts in a manner that is inconsistent with the Fifth Circuit's decision and the Department of Justice regulation permitting termination based on deferred action. The decision fails altogether to consider the DHS regulation's stringent requirements for maintaining and renewing DACA and the Fifth Circuit holding preserving DACA's forbearance from removal. Thus, the Board's decision paves the way for DACA recipients to be detained and placed in removal proceedings without regard for their societal contributions, clean records, or public support, and even though they cannot be removed while their DACA remains valid," concluded the lawmakers.

In addition to Bennet, Durbin, Padilla, Cortez Masto, Kelly, Garcia, and Ramirez, U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and U.S. Representatives Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), Greg Casar (D-Texas), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), Jesús "Chuy" García (D-Ill.), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Jennifer McClellan (D-Va.), Sarah McBride (D-Del.), James McGovern (D-Mass.), Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Andrea Salinas (D-Ore.), Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.), Greg Stanton (D-Ariz.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), and Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) signed the letter.

Bennet has consistently fought to protect DACA recipients and to ensure they can continue to build their futures in the only country they ever called home. Last month, Bennet introduced three bills which target critical reforms at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP); the Keeping Immigrants and Destinations Safe (KIDS) Act; the Training, Responsibility, Uniforms, and Standards for Transparency (TRUST) Act; and the Oversight, Protection, and Enforcement Notification (OPEN) Act. In March 2026, Bennet joined Senators Masto and Durbin, as well as 38 of their Democratic colleagues to send a letter to outgoing Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Joseph Edlow demanding that the Department reduce the delays in processing renewal applications under the DACA program. In January, Bennet joined his colleagues in introducing the Providing Useful Budgets for Localities to Invest in Cops by Substituting Appropriations from Federal Enforcement To Yield Results (PUBLIC SAFETY) Act, legislation to redirect nearly $75 billion in funding passed in the Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) from ICE and send it instead to local law enforcement programs to help hire and train 200,000 local police officers in communities across the country.

In November 2025, Bennet joined his colleagues in introducing the bicameral Restoring Access to Detainees Act, legislation to ensure DHS allows noncitizens who have been detained to contact their legal counsel and families. In August 2025, Bennet joined the Immigration Enforcement Identification Safety (IEIS) Act to prohibit immigration enforcement officials from wearing masks and to require them to wear visible identification. In April 2025, Bennet and U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) also led bicameral colleagues in urging Former Attorney General Pam Bondi to address the Executive Office for Immigration Review's decision to fire key immigration judges. In February 2025, Bennet joined his Senate colleagues to introduce the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act, which would reinstate DHS's long-standing policies to prevent ICE from making arrests at sensitive locations like schools, hospitals, and places of worship.

The text of the letter is available HERE and below.

Dear Acting Attorney General Blanche:

We write to object to the Board of Immigration Appeals precedential decision in Matter of Santiago-Santiago, in which the Board undermined protections provided by a grant of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). We are troubled to see the Board, and by extension, the Department of Justice, attempt to circumvent legal protections for DACA recipients, which have been codified in regulation by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and affirmed in a recent decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. We urge you to take steps within your authority as Attorney General to ensure the Board's rulings regarding DACA are interpreted in a manner consistent with current law.

DACA is well established as "a form of enforcement discretion not to pursue . . . removal." As the Board noted in its decision, a DACA recipient "cannot be removed from the United States while she has DACA protection."

DHS established DACA in 2012 by memorandum and codified it in regulation in 2022. To be eligible for protections pursuant to DACA, non-U.S. citizens must meet strict requirements, including establishing that they arrived in the United States as children, meeting strict educational or vocational requirements, and undergoing stringent background checks. If approved, DACA recipients receive a two-year period of forbearance from removal and work authorization; recipients must renew their DACA grant (and undergo new background checks) every two years. By regulation, immigration judges may, in the exercise of discretion, terminate removal proceedings for individuals who have received grants of deferred action.

In response to a challenge by Republican states, processing of initial DACA applications has been enjoined since 2021. In 2021, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas vacated the DACA memorandum, concluding that the DACA program was unlawful. However, the Court stayed its order as it applied to individuals who had already received DACA grants at the time of the decision, allowing them to maintain and renew DACA every two years under the conditions of the 2012 memorandum. After DACA was codified in regulation, the District Court struck down the regulation but maintained the stay. Last year, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision that portions of DACA violate the law, but, significantly, narrowed the scope of the remedy to Texas, allowing DACA to continue in full effect in the other 49 states. The Fifth Circuit also maintained the nationwide stay for current DACA recipients, acknowledging the "immense reliance interests" of current DACA recipients and the potential for significant disruption to others reliant on the program.

Most important, in its decision, the Fifth Circuit stated that it would "not disturb DACA's policy of forbearance." DACA's policy of forbearance, as explained in the DACA regulation, "is a form of enforcement discretion not to pursue the removal of certain aliens[.]" (emphasis added).

By concluding in Matter of Santiago-Santiago that an immigration judge may not terminate removal proceedings based solely on the fact that the respondent has been granted DACA, the Board acts in a manner that is inconsistent with the Fifth Circuit's decision and the Department of Justice regulation permitting termination based on deferred action. The decision fails altogether to consider the DHS regulation's stringent requirements for maintaining and renewing DACA and the Fifth Circuit holding preserving DACA's forbearance from removal. Thus, the Board's decision paves the way for DACA recipients to be detained and placed in removal proceedings without regard for their societal contributions, clean records, or public support, and even though they cannot be removed while their DACA remains valid.

To better address these concerns and reconcile the BIA decision with the Department's claims of "restoring integrity to the immigration adjudication system" and reflecting "straightforward interpretations of clear statutory language," we request detailed responses to the following questions by Friday, June 26:

1. How does Matter of Santiago-Santiago comport with the Fifth Circuit's binding precedent in Texas v. United States preserving DACA's policy of forbearance, the DHS regulation codifying DACA's policy of forbearance, and the DOJ regulation allowing for termination of removal proceedings based on a grant of deferred action?
2. How many DACA recipients have pending removal cases?
3. How many DACA recipients in removal proceedings are appearing before the immigration courts on the detained docket?
4. How many DACA recipients on the detained docket have indicated they have pending renewal applications?
5. How are the immigration courts addressing cases for detained individuals upon notification that their DACA has been renewed?
6. How many motions to recalendar or motions to reopen before the immigration courts has DHS filed in cases involving DACA recipients?

We look forward to your prompt response.

###