Connect with us

border

Immigrant Rights Advocates Push for Extended Housing Solutions for Minors

Published

on

Immigrant rights advocates seek extension of settlement for housing of minors

Immigrant rights advocates have petitioned a federal judge to prolong a 2022 settlement concerning the treatment of minors by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in Texas. They argue that the agency has consistently failed to comply with the terms of the settlement.

During a hearing held in Los Angeles, Chief U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee did not reach a final verdict but indicated through the discussions that she might favor extending the settlement for an additional two and a half years.

This settlement is linked to the 1997 Flores consent decree, which governs how minors in custody are treated. Judge Gee has overseen the enforcement of this decree for a decade, ensuring protections against the prolonged detention of children.

The 2022 agreement was initiated in response to a humanitarian crisis that unfolded during the previous Trump administration. It addressed the alarming conditions faced by children detained in El Paso and the Rio Grande Valley, where they often endured weeks of confinement in unsanitary makeshift jails.

CBP has been accused of neglecting the essential needs of these minors, with advocates highlighting ongoing issues since the settlement. They assert that the agency continues to separate children from family, impede access to legal assistance, and deny adequate clothing, nutrition, and recreational activities.

“The dire effects of these violations are worsened by extended detention periods, often lasting over a week,” stated attorneys from the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, laying bare the consequences of CBP’s practices.

Joshua McCroskey, representing the U.S. Justice Department, raised objections primarily centered on procedural issues. He contended that the 2022 settlement should be viewed as a mere guideline rather than a court-enforceable agreement, suggesting a breach of contract should have been the proper legal approach.

Judge Gee, however, appeared unconvinced by this argument, leaning towards acknowledging her authority over the ongoing issues stemming from the Flores consent decree.