The new document changes the word “child” to “unmarried individual under the age of 18” in many instances.
Although DACA programme is federal, the fate of its nearly 800,000 participants will vary from state to state, with state policies determining whether or not they will be able to continue studying, receive financial aid or even drive legally.
The ruling is the latest legal blow to the president’s sweeping executive order barring travellers from seven countries for 90 days.
The lawsuit claims Trump’s decision was “motivated, at least in part, by a discriminatory motive” against Mexicans, who are the largest beneficiary of the programme.
Trump’s administration defended its travel ban in Supreme Court, emphasising its executive power to bar people from six-Muslim majority countries.
The lawsuit said that some US Customs and Border Protection agents referred to President Trump’s tough immigration policies when turning away asylum seekers.
The ACLU which sought the extension argued that those arrested in immigration enforcement operations face persecution, torture or death if deported to Iraq.
Grandparents, aunts, uncles or grandchildren of US citizens from six Muslim-majority countries are not being allowed to enter the country.
The leaders, while recognising they do not possess the resources to combat their problems, acknowledge that a bigger investment is needed from their side too.
The Department of Justice said in a court filing it would appeal against a ruling by US district judge Theodore Chuang in Maryland to the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia.
Two judges, at a hearing on the ban, have pushed the government to explain what would happen if Trump decides to ban all Muslims from entering the US.
The order temporarily suspends visas for certain countries, changes screening procedures for immigration programmes and aims to implement biometric checks.