This statement can be attributed to Wendy Cervantes, director of Immigration and Immigrant Families at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
August 21, 2025, Washington, D.C.,—On Monday, August 25, a Trump Administration rule will go into effect that strips health care coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) from Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients. This comes at a time when DACA recipients and their families face harsh immigrant enforcement actions and increased barriers to basic needs programs.
Due to the persistent advocacy of CLASP, immigrant leaders, and other organizations, the Biden Administration issued a rule that allowed individuals with DACA to purchase health coverage through the ACA Marketplace starting on November 1, 2024—after more than a decade of being wrongfully denied such coverage. With access to health insurance, DACA recipients have been able to build healthier, more stable lives for themselves and their families.
A 2024 survey found that DACA recipients were nearly three times more likely to be unsinured than U.S. citizens. Removing access to ACA coverage will leave thousands of DACA recipients without anywhere else to turn for affordable health coverage. This rule will not only impact DACA recipients, but also the children in their households who benefit when their parents are healthy and are more likely to have access to health care themselves when their parents do. Nearly a third of DACA recipients are parents, according to a 2023 survey.
The end of health coverage for DACA recipients comes as the DACA program itself faces an uncertain future and families across the country are beginning to feel the devastating effects of Trump’s budget reconciliation bill, including cuts to health care coverage, food assistance, and other programs that help keep children and families out of poverty. With tax cuts for billionaires and the largest budget in U.S. history for immigrant detention and deportation, it is clear that the administration’s strategy of gutting basic needs resources for individuals and families has nothing to do with cost savings—it’s about cruelty.
CLASP firmly condemns this rule that will deny thousands of parents, breadwinners, entrepreneurs, and students the hard-won and short-lived lifeline of access to affordable health coverage. As members of Congress prepare to return to Washington in just a few weeks, we urge them to finally deliver on a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients and other immigrant youth, and invest in solutions that ensure all parents and children can lead healthy lives with dignity.
CLASP writes in opposition to the harmful new interpretation the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is taking in regard to the definition of a “Federal public benefit” under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. We respectfully submit this comment urging the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to withdraw this proposed rule in its entirety.
By Brianna Nargiso
(EXCERPT)
Suma Setty, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), has studied the effects of immigration enforcement on early childhood systems. She says that fear among immigrant families has created a “chilling effect,” where families are opting out of programs or disengaging from child care systems entirely.
By Nicol Leon
(EXCERPT)
Subjecting unaccompanied minors to body exams for tattoos could put the children at risk of sexual abuse and trauma, said Wendy Cervantes, director of immigration and immigrant families at the Center for Law and Social Policy. In 2024, the U.S. Justice Department under the Biden administration alleged in a civil lawsuit that children were sexually abused by employees of Southwest Key, a nonprofit that contracted with the federal government to provide housing for unaccompanied minors. The Trump administration dropped the lawsuit in March.
By Ashley Burnside
On July 4, President Trump signed his reconciliation law that will make changes to the Child Tax Credit (CTC). The reconciliation law provides tax breaks for the wealthiest people by slashing Medicaid and food assistance funding, and will make changes to how states earn revenue.
The CTC is a tax credit available to eligible families with children. In 2017, lawmakers temporarily doubled the maximum credit; restricted children without Social Security numbers from being eligible; and made the credit available to families with higher incomes, among other changes. In 2021, lawmakers temporarily expanded the CTC, which helped to decrease child poverty by nearly half. These changes expired after one year. Now, President Trump’s new reconciliation bill will change how big the CTC will be and will cut some families off from accessing it.
Here are ten things you should know about the CTC:
Families who file their taxes, have an eligible child, and have incomes within the allowable limits are generally eligible to claim the CTC each year. The program is far-reaching, doesn’t require additional paperwork beyond filing taxes, and lifts millions of people out of poverty each year.
Under prior law, the maximum CTC was $2,000 per child. Beginning in 2026, the maximum credit amount will be adjusted annually for inflation.
The CTC allows parents to afford investments for their family, like summer camp, new toys, or a musical instrument. CLASP survey research concluded that in 2021 parents spent their expanded CTC monthly payments on both essentials (groceries, bills, and rent/mortgage payments) and enrichment activities for their children
Married couples making up to $400,000 per year are eligible for the maximum CTC. But because of the way the credit is structured, families with lower earnings are not eligible for the full credit. The credit phases in at 15 cents per dollar earned above $2,500 per year, and is only partially refundable. A married couple with two children needs to make at least $41,500 per year to get the full CTC, for example. An estimated 19 million children are in families who will continue to not get the full credit because their parents don’t earn enough.
An estimated 39 percent of Black children and 36 percent of Latino children didn’t get the full credit in 2023 because their parents did not earn enough. This is due to the structural and historical racism within our laws and labor market that have left communities of color with deep inequities, resulting in workers of color receiving lower wages and fewer opportunities for economic prosperity.
The 2021 law temporarily extended the age of eligibility for the credit to include seventeen-year-olds, but this provision expired after one year.
The reconciliation bill has permanently excluded children from the CTC who don’t have an SSN. This will make an estimated 1 million children ineligible for the credit, a misguided exclusion that will hurt children’s outcomes and force children and families further into poverty.
Under prior law, parents could claim the CTC for their child if they have an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), but the reconciliation law changed this policy. Now, at least one parent must have an SSN to claim the credit. (A married couple where one spouse has an SSN and one spouse has an ITIN would be eligible.) This will exclude an estimated 2.6 million U.S. citizen children from getting the CTC because their parents don’t have SSNs.
Under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, the CTC was distributed monthly to families from July through December 2021. Since that law has expired, families can now only get the credit annually when they file their tax return.
Permanently making the credit fully available to families with lower incomes; permanently increasing the size of the credit to at least the levels provided in 2021 (up to $3,600 for children ages zero through five); permanently making the credit available monthly; and permanently extending credit eligibility to seventeen-year-olds would deliver an income boost from the CTC to more than 60 million children and help families afford essentials.
The changes to the CTC passed under President Trump’s reconciliation law will cut off some immigrant families from accessing the CTC and will continue to leave families with the lowest incomes out of the full credit, disproportionately excluding Black and Latino families. The CTC doesn’t reach the families who would benefit the most from receiving it. Lawmakers should fix this backwards structure by making the credit fully available to families with low earnings and by ending the ITIN restrictions.
By Alyssa Fortner and Shira Small
Answer: Child care helps parents or caregivers work, look for jobs, attend school and trainings, and tend to other responsibilities while their children are receiving early care and education that is safe, stable, and developmentally appropriate. It is a critical support for family well-being and economic stability.
Answer: The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) provides child care assistance through subsidies for families with low incomes and helps improve the overall quality of care for all children in states, tribes, and territories. CCDF is made up of the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), a discretionary funding stream (which is determined annually by Congress during appropriations) and the Child Care Entitlement to States (CCES), a mandatory funding stream (which is consistent and guaranteed funding that can only be changed through distinct legislation).
Answer: In fiscal year (FY) 2025, CCDF was funded at $12.2 billion, $8.75 billion from the CCDBG and $3.55 billion from the CCES. This is level funding from FY2024.
Answer: To draw down all available federal dollars, states are required to contribute funding toward their CCDF-funded child care assistance program through a state match and a “maintenance of effort” (MOE). Territories and tribes are exempt from this requirement. States must match their CCES dollars at their state’s Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (FMAPs) rate. MOE requires states to continue spending at least the same amount on child care services as they did prior to reauthorization of CCDBG in 1996. States can also invest more than the requirements to support their programs.
Answer: In addition to their mandatory funds from CCES, the amount of money each state and territory receives annually is calculated using a formula that considers factors like the state share of children younger than five, the state’s per capita income, and the number of children receiving free or reduced-price lunches. A portion (typically around two percent) of discretionary funding and up to two percent of mandatory funding must be reserved for tribal child care, whose funds are distributed based on a formula that considers the number of children under age 13 in the tribal service area and other program characteristics.
Answer: Yes, states can utilize Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) funds for child care. Both of these grants can be spent directly on child care, and states can also transfer up to 30 percent of TANF funds to CCDF or 10 percent to SSBG. However, the total amount transferred to CCDF and SSBG cannot be more than 30 percent of TANF funds that a state received.
Answer: Under federal law, eligible children must be age 13 or younger or up to 19 for those with disabilities or under court supervision; reside with a caregiver(s) that is working or attending school or training programs; have a family income that does not exceed 85 percent of their state median income (SMI); and is in a family who does not have more $1 million in assets. States have the ability to modify most eligibility parameters within the confines of the federal law, including, for example, establishing lower income eligibility limits. Many states do set their threshold below the federal limit of 85 percent SMI due to constrained funding.
Answer: According to the most recently published data, in FY2022, 1,434,900 children were served by CCDF in states and territories. In FY2023, the Administration for Children and Families reported that 17,000 children were served by CCDF in tribes. However, this figure is likely an underestimation because not all tribal CCDF recipients are required to report the number of children served, and tribal CCDF data is made public less frequently.
Answer: Since FY2006, the peak year for participation, to FY2022 (the most recently published data), 335,200 children lost CCDF-funded child care, because CCDF funding has not kept pace with inflation. There were 225,204 providers who accept CCDF subsidies in FY2022, a decrease of 68 percent (475,394) from 2006. This decrease is due to a variety of factors, including low reimbursement rates from CCDF, administrative burdens in the program, and a decreasing provider workforce rooted in undercompensation and inequities in the child care sector.
Answer: No. In FY2021, 11.5 million children were eligible under federal rules. Due to the flexibility states have in determining eligibility, 8 million children were eligible to be served by CCDF funds under state rules. The Office of the Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation estimates that approximately 1.8 million children were reached through all funding sources in 2021. This means that only 15 percent of those eligible under federal rules and 22 percent eligible under state rules had access to assistance.
Answer: In CLASP’s most recent analysis using FY2020 data, we found that Black and Latino families are overrepresented in who is eligible for care. This means that a racial/ethnic group represents a higher proportion of all eligible children when compared to their proportion of the total population of children. This overrepresentation is a result of historical and current economic inequity within some racial and ethnic groups that has led to lower average incomes and created disproportionate need for financial assistance to afford and access child care for these children and their families. Black children had the highest rate of access and Asian and multiracial children had the lowest rates of access nationally when compared to potentially eligible children of other racial and ethnic groups.
Answer: CCDF has never been funded at the level needed to support all eligible children, and even more children could benefit from child care assistance than those who are currently eligible. To deliver on a child care system that truly meets the needs of children and families and to support the severely undervalued child care workforce, there needs to be large-scale, sustained federal investments in a system that aligns with the child care needs of children and families. With these investments, this country must confront and address the ways that racism, sexism, and classism have shaped the devaluation of child care and early education, the many other systems people rely on, and how they continue to directly harm children, families, and providers today.
(EXCERPT)
That’s true going back to the first Trump administration, according to research from the Center for Law and Social Policy, which found that immigration raids and fear of immigration enforcement contributed to a chilling effect on school attendance.
(EXCERPT)
These comments were echoed by Isha Weerasinghe, director of public benefits justice at the Center for Law and Social Policy (Opens in a new window)(CLASP), a nonprofit focused on advancing policy for people with low incomes. HHS’ change will also make it difficult for healthcare and social service facilities to determine who is eligible for services, “potentially refusing to care for many more than those who are deemed ‘qualified,’ making it harder for everyone to access services,” Weerasinghe added.
By Bryce Covert
(EXCERPT)
So advocates marshalled research, with the help of national groups including the National Association for the Education of Young Children and Center for Law and Social Policy. They highlighted that there has been no evidence that stricter child care regulations lead to reduced supply. Lawmakers seemed moved by the argument that lower ratios support better health and safety for children.
CLASP responds to the Request for Information (RFI): Ensuring Lawful Regulation and Unleashing Innovation To Make America Healthy Again. We seek to offer our perspective and insights based on our work on programs administered by HHS, including child care and early education programs run by the Office of Child Care and the Office of Head Start, Medicaid, Affordable Care Act Marketplaces, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.