Will DACA protections be codified into federal law before 2028?
Peer-to-Peer Order Book
Live- A participant offers to buy or sell a contract at a price they choose.
- Another participant takes the opposite side.
- The exchange matches the orders and holds the collateral.
- Correct contracts settle at $1.00 · incorrect at $0.00.
- Fees are shown before any order is submitted.
What this market asks
In plain language: forecasters are estimating the probability that the outcome in the question actually happens by the deadline. The market currently prices 18% YES / 82% NO. Resolution is mechanical — it depends only on the criteria and sources below, not on opinions, headlines, or who "deserves" to win the argument.
- ▸ A pending circuit ruling could strike the program entirely, forcing Congress to act on a deadline.
- ▸ Business coalitions in agriculture and tech have unified behind a narrow codification bill.
- ▸ Standalone Dreamer bills have historically polled above 65% support in both parties' bases.
- ▸ Every codification attempt since 2013 has failed when paired with enforcement demands.
- ▸ Border legislation (see m-border) is consuming all available immigration floor time.
- ▸ An election year makes standalone legalization votes unlikely for either chamber's leadership.
Resolution criteria
Resolves YES if a statute granting permanent legal status or a citizenship pathway to DACA-eligible recipients is enacted before January 1, 2028. Court rulings or executive actions do not count.
- Any participant may flag a resolution within 72 hours with cited evidence.
- Trading pauses; positions freeze at last price while flags are reviewed.
- An independent resolution council (rotating, disclosed members) rules within 14 days using only the stated sources.
- Rulings are published with full written reasoning; credits settle after publication.
Related on Quorly
Discussion · 312 comments
LiveThis market pairs well with the related Pulse question — the gap between public sentiment and market probability is the interesting signal here.
The market is underpricing this. Base rates on comparable outcomes put fair value closer to 26%. Holding YES at 13 entry.
The NO side is about timelines, not merits. Even if the outcome eventually happens, the deadline in the criteria is doing a lot of work.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
YES at 18% is the value side. When the resolution source is this mechanical, momentum in the underlying process matters more than commentary.
YES at 18% is the value side. When the resolution source is this mechanical, momentum in the underlying process matters more than commentary.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
The market is underpricing this. Base rates on comparable outcomes put fair value closer to 26%. Holding YES at 13 entry.
Fading the crowd here. "Every codification attempt since 2013 has failed when paired with enforcement demands." That blocker has killed similar outcomes repeatedly — I have fair value near 8%.
Following this one closely. The resolution criteria are unusually clean, which is why participation is this high (7.7K forecasters).
The NO side is about timelines, not merits. Even if the outcome eventually happens, the deadline in the criteria is doing a lot of work.