DACA privacy protections

Full Title:
Protect DREAMer Confidentiality Act of 2025

Summary#

This bill would limit how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may share information submitted by people who applied for deferred action under DACA. Its main change is to require DHS to keep DACA application information confidential and to bar referrals of deferred DACA cases to federal, state, local, or Tribal law enforcement, with a few narrow exceptions. The broad goal is to protect the privacy of DACA applicants and keep their application data from being used for immigration enforcement.

  • Who is covered: Information submitted as part of a request for consideration or reconsideration under the DACA program, submitted to DHS after June 15, 2012.
  • Privacy rule: DHS must protect that application information from disclosure to ICE, CBP, or any state, local, or Tribal law enforcement for any purpose other than running the DACA program.
  • No referrals: DHS may not refer a person whose case has been deferred under DACA to ICE, CBP, the Department of Justice, or any other law enforcement agency.
  • Limited exceptions: Information can be shared to identify or prevent fraud, for particularized national security reasons tied to an individual application, or to investigate or prosecute any felony not related to immigration status.
  • Definitions: The bill defines the DACA program by referring to existing DHS rules and memos and defines the Secretary as the DHS Secretary.

What it means for you#

  • DACA applicants / DREAMers

    • Your application materials (including personal details) would be protected from sharing with ICE, CBP, and state/local/Tribal law enforcement except in the narrow situations listed.
    • If your case is deferred under DACA, DHS may not refer you to immigration or other law enforcement under this bill.

  • People worried about immigration enforcement

    • The bill could reduce the chance that information in a DACA file is used to start immigration enforcement actions, except for the listed exceptions.

  • DHS and its employees

    • DHS must adopt and follow rules or practices to keep DACA application information confidential and to limit referrals. The bill does not detail exactly how to do this.

  • Federal, state, local, and Tribal law enforcement

    • These agencies would generally be barred from receiving DACA application data from DHS, unless the data are shared under the bill’s exceptions.

  • National security and criminal investigators

    • The bill allows DHS to share information when needed to prevent fraud, for specific national security reasons tied to an application, or for investigating/prosecuting felonies not about immigration status.

  • Courts, prosecutors, and defense attorneys

    • The bill does not clearly explain how it interacts with subpoenas, court orders, or other legal processes requesting DACA application material.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

  • The bill text does not include a fiscal note or cost estimate.
  • This could mean DHS may have to spend money to set up or strengthen privacy safeguards and procedures to control data sharing. That is a reasonable inference from the changes but is not stated in the bill.
  • It is unclear whether the bill would reduce or increase costs for other agencies that currently access DACA-related information.

Proponents' View#

  • The bill appears intended to protect the confidentiality of people who apply for DACA and to prevent their application data from being used for immigration enforcement.
  • It could be seen as increasing trust that applicants’ information will not be handed to ICE, CBP, or local law enforcement, which may encourage eligible people to apply.
  • It appears aimed at limiting use of DACA application data to the purposes of administering the DACA program, while still allowing DHS to act against fraud or serious non-immigration felonies and to address narrowly defined national security risks.

Opponents' View#

  • One concern is that the bill does not clearly explain how DHS must handle subpoenas, court orders, or other legal obligations to disclose information.
  • The rules for the listed exceptions (fraud, national security, felonies) are not fully detailed; it is unclear who decides when sharing is allowed and what oversight exists.
  • Limiting referrals to law enforcement could be seen as making it harder to investigate crimes connected to immigration matters, depending on how the exceptions are applied.
  • Implementation could require new DHS procedures and resources; the bill does not state who would pay for any added administrative steps.