Just to be clear as to where I am coming from:

You've failed readers seeking clarity.

I say they should NEVER get citizenship or anything remotely like it.  Just b/c their children are not deported and have some green card or whatever it would be called... does not mean the illegals should get Anything from the USA at all.   they violated our laws and should be punished just like an American would be for violating our laws AND deported

You have muddled plural personal pronouns by overuse; I've italicized the confusing ones.  Indeed, the first and final "they" really apply not only to the parents, but also to the "children"--and I strongly support such an interpretation.  But elsewhere, you've rejected exactly that sensible--and just--interpretation.

As a practical matter, newly blessing the uninvited illegally arrived foreign "children" as legal residents of the U.S.A. automatically confers the legal privilege to petition the U.S. Gov't to issue a pair of often-contrived family reünification visas, which would legally bless a permanent return to the U.S.A. by exactly the illegal-immigrant parents who might have recently or in the near future been deported, but whom advocates of the existing DACA claim they'd prevent from obtaining "citizenship or anything remotely like it".  I write "contrived" because return of the "children" to their native land to rejoin their parents is practically never considered an acceptable option for family reünification, is it?

And after being legal family reünified residents for 5 years, the parents can apply to permanently receive permanent income under U.S. entitlement programs, including food stamps, Medicare, and some Social Security programs.  All of the entitlements delivered by federal or state social workers who are employed (itself a de facto ethnic entitlement that imposes extra costs on federal and state budgets) to provide the foolishly generous new host country's benefits to the uninvited foreigners in their native languages (because the foreign recipients never accepted that learning English was a moral obligation to the host country).  Oh!  Adult "children" are not limited to reünification that permanently admits a pair of foreign parents into the U.S.A.; the "children" can also petition for brothers, sisters, aunts, and uncles, all permanently entitled to receive generous benefits from the U.S.A.--the only limit is the "children's" audacity.

So "just to be clear", quite contrary to the arguments you presented advocating renewal of DACA, there is no way that's guaranteed to prevent "the illegals" from "get[ting] Anything from the USA at all".

I don't mean to derail this thread but what about what I'll call the legal illegals.

I'll try to explain. 
Several years ago I heard of women from the middle east, about 8 months pregnant, coming to a
women's hospital in NY to have their babies.  When the child was born they were looked after by
people from the middle east living in NY until the birth certificates arrived.
They then got on a plane and went home with their newborn US citizen.
We probably won't hear from them again for 18-20 years.......but then what?
How can this be legal?

I can't remember which magazine I read this in.