Los Angeles Times
By Cindy Carcamo
July 25, 2015
A
federal judge has ruled that hundreds of immigrant women and children
held in holding facilities should be released, finding their detention
“deplorable” and in grave
violation of an earlier court settlement.
U.S.
District Judge Dolly Gee said federal authorities had violated key
provisions of an 18-year-old court settlement that put restrictions on
the detention of migrant
children.
The
ruling, released late Friday, is another blow to President Obama’s
immigration policies and leaves questions about what the U.S. will do
with the large number of children
and parents who crossed the border from Latin America last year.
The
Obama administration is detaining an estimated 1,700 parents and
children at three detention facilities, two in Texas and one in
Pennsylvania.
In
her 25-page ruling, Gee blasted federal officials, saying that children
had been held in substandard conditions at the two Texas detention
centers. She found “widespread
and deplorable conditions in the holding cells of Border Patrol
stations.” In addition, she wrote that federal officials “failed to meet
even the minimal standard” of “safe and sanitary” conditions at
temporary holding cells.
“It
is astonishing that defendants have enacted a policy requiring such
expensive infrastructure without more evidence to show that it would be
compliant with an agreement
that has been in effect for nearly 20 years,” Gee wrote.
Gee gave the government until Aug. 3 to explain why an order she plans to issue should not be implemented within 90 days.
------------
For the record
12:30
p.m.: An earlier version of this article mischaracterized the judge's
ruling as requiring the release of detained immigrants as soon as
possible. The judge gave
the government until Aug. 3 to show why an order she plans to issue to
release the immigrants should not be implemented within 90 days.
------------
The
judge signaled that she planned to enter a nationwide injunction
requiring Department of Homeland Security to come into compliance with a
1997 settlement—better known
as Flores— that set specific legal requirements for the housing of
immigrant children.
DHS plans to respond to the court's ruling by the Aug. 3 deadline, she said. It’s unclear whether ICE will appeal the ruling.
“We
are disappointed with the court's decision and are reviewing it in
consultation with the Department of Justice,” Marsha L. Catron, press
secretary for the U.S. Department
of Homeland Security, said in a prepared statement.
Last
summer, as an unprecedented number of women and children from Central
America were illegally crossing the Southwest Border, Homeland Security
Secretary Jeh Johnson
ordered that immigration authorities dramatically expand the number of
detention beds for families.
Johnson
said at the time that he wanted to send the message that if people come
to the U.S. illegally, they would be detained and then sent home. In
addition, individuals
held in detention are placed in an accelerated docket in immigration
courts and can be removed from the country more quickly.
More
than 68,000 people were apprehended along the border in fiscal year
2014. They were detained while officials decided whether they had a
right to stay. Initially,
many were released with orders to appear at immigration offices
throughout the country, because there weren't appropriate facilities to
house families. Then the Obama administration opened new detention
centers for mothers and children.
Bryan Johnson, an immigration attorney in New York, said the ruling should extend beyond those still in detention.
“Given
the court's ruling that family detention is unlawful, all of the
mothers and children who were removed as a result of family detention
should be immediately allowed
back into the United States to apply for asylum or special immigrant
juvenile status,” he said.
Ira
Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration
Reform, a Washington-based group opposed to illegal immigration, said
Gee’s decision sends a “dangerous
message.”
“The
number of kids that are going to be enticed from this ruling to come
from Central America and risk their lives and subject themselves to
injury or rape to cross Mexico
is going to rise,” Mehlman said.
Many
of the Central American families and children who crossed the Southwest
border illegally last summer were fleeing crushing poverty and
escalating gang violence. The
exodus was also partly fueled by rumors in their home countries that
unaccompanied children and single parents with at least one child would
be allowed to stay.
Some
people who crossed were apprehended, while others surrendered to border
enforcement officials and requested asylum, which is within their
rights under U.S. and international
laws.
In
reaction, the Obama administration expanded detention centers for
families, and the court system — already grappling with a backlog of
cases — became even more bogged
down. Hundreds have been ordered removed, some have been released.
Mothers and children are still detained at two Texas facilities — one in
Dilley, another in Karnes City, both run by private companies under
contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
A third, in Berks County, Pa., is run by the county.
The
Flores vs. Meese settlement requires the U.S. to release immigrant
children or house them in the “least restrictive environment.” A
juvenile immigrant cannot be detained
for more than an estimated 72 hours unless they are a significant
flight risk or a danger to themselves or others. The children must be
released to a parent or legal guardian.
One
of the arguments federal officials made was that the settlement did not
apply to children who are accompanied by parents. Gee disagreed.
In
April, the judge issued a preliminary ruling, signaling that she would
find in favor of the plaintiffs that it was inappropriate to hold a
parent and child unless there
was a flight or safety risk.
Still,
Gee asked both sides to negotiate a revised agreement before her final
ruling. After six weeks of negotiations, both sides failed to reach an
agreement.
Leon
Fresco, a deputy assistant attorney general, had warned Gee that if her
ruling stood, it would encourage the Obama administration to separate
parents and children,
turning them into “de facto unaccompanied children.”
Peter
Schey and Carlos Holguin, who launched the lawsuit against federal
officials and have served as court-appointed lawyers for all immigrant
children in federal custody
since the 1997 settlement, said the ruling marks the beginning of the
end of family detention.
“We’re
hopeful this decision will be among the final straws ending a
misguided, mindless policy of incarcerating women and children in
violation of the Flores settlement,
international law and all of what most of us hold decent,” Holguin
said.
Gee’s
ruling comes in the midst of a resurgence in the debate on immigration
following Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s
characterization of Mexican immigrants
as drug dealers and rapists. Just a few weeks later, the issue was
again in the forefront after the suspect in the killing of a woman on
San Francisco’s waterfront turned out to be a Mexican national with a
history of drug convictions who had been repeatedly
deported.
Her
ruling also comes about a month after federal officials announced a new
policy that would allow hundreds of immigrant women and children to go
free on bond if they
could prove they were eligible for asylum or other type of immigration
relief. But immigrant rights activists continue to argue that mothers
and children should not be held at detention facilities at all.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment