{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01818181818181818, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003305785123966942, 'mean_word_length': 5.727777777777778, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Semi-legality and belonging in the Obama era: the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals memorandum as an instrument of governance

ABSTRACT While the effects of the Deferred Actions for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order have been analysed by a number of scholars, little attention has been paid to the ways in which this program has functioned as a technology of governance. Drawing from content analysis of political discourse regarding the 2012 DACA executive memorandum, this paper offers new directions for thinking about one of the key legacies of the Obama administration. It contextualizes DACA within a global proliferation of variegated legal statuses and argues that DACA discourses allowed state actors to re-invigorate notions of US exceptionalism and humanitarianism, while deeming ‘illegality’ an objective fact existing outside of the state’s control. In doing so, notwithstanding the DACA memorandum’s limitations in alleviating conditions of ‘illegality’ even for eligible subjects, dominant discourses surrounding the program functioned to legitimise state practices and normalise the bounds of national belonging and ‘good citizenship’ in the face of contradicting global realities.