A federal district court judge ruled Wednesday night that migrant children who entered the U.S. illegally must be detained “quickly” rather than kept in dangerous open spaces along the border.
The ruling, handed down by Judge Dolly M. Gee of the U.S. District Court for Central California, largely sided with attorneys who represent children in class action lawsuits. The law puts minors in the legal custody of the Department of Homeland Security and entitled to certain rights and protections, including a safe and sanitary environment, even if formal formalities are not yet in place. determined that there is a right.
The ruling comes amid intense political and cultural debate over the rights of immigrants, including children, to enter the United States without authorization. An influx of people crossing the U.S.-Mexico border has strained migrant processing centers in southern San Diego County, with migrants waiting hours or even days in makeshift camps before being detained. There is.
The outdoor areas where migrants are waiting lack shelter, food, and sanitation, raising numerous public health concerns for the most vulnerable. Local aid workers and medical volunteers say unaccompanied children and young families are in poor health, suffering from trauma and chronic health conditions, requiring medications that have long worn off. It is said that they sometimes arrive.
Aid groups say dehydration and heat stroke are common problems on hot days in the desert, and nighttime temperatures, wind and rain create conditions that are more likely to lead to hypothermia. Doctors are especially concerned about these factors in children because many children have lower body fat than adults and can become malnourished on travel.
The government had argued that it had no obligation to provide services because the children were not yet in U.S. custody. The judge cited Border Patrol agents' control over the removal of minors from the scene and their authority to influence whether children receive aid and medical care as the basis for their decision.
“The ability to exercise discretion and make decisions that affect a child's health and welfare, whether that decision is to provide or withhold care, is subject to the child's law,” the 12-page order states. “Indicates that the child will maintain physical custody of the child.'' “Unlike adults, juveniles are always in some form of detention.”
Judge Gee denied the lawyers' request for a specific time limit by which the minors could be held at the scene, but said the Department of Homeland Security would process all children “expeditiously” and place them in safe and sanitary facilities. He said it needed to be contained. This is consistent with her DHS concerns about the unique vulnerabilities of minors. ”
He said Border Patrol agents will be given “as much time as DHS reasonably requires to prepare the minor and/or make active arrangements to transport the minor to a more appropriate facility.” Police should stop escorting minors to crime scenes or detaining them at crime scenes, with the exception of minors.''
Lawyers representing the children had argued that the children should be provided with housing and services under a 1997 consent decree known as the Flores Settlement Agreement. The agreement sets standards of care for migrant children in government custody, provides them with access to basic facilities such as toilets, food, and drinking water, and generally provides It required that children be housed in facilities licensed by the state for childcare. Child welfare system. Lawyers filed a motion in February seeking to enforce those conditions on outdoor children.
The question was whether children who crossed the southern border, alone or with their families, would become a liability to the federal government while they waited outdoors to surrender to U.S. border officials.
Lawyers say in their motion that the children who have not yet been formally arrested are no longer in the same category as those already in official custody because they are prohibited from leaving the camp and have no way to return across the border. They argued that they had a right to safe and sanitary housing.
In response, Justice Department lawyers argued that because the children were not yet officially in U.S. Customs and Border Protection custody, there was no obligation to provide such services. They had no objection to the poor conditions at the camp.
“CBP apprehends minors and promptly transports them to safe and sanitary U.S. Border Patrol facilities,” the attorneys wrote. “However, until that happens, Plaintiff will not be in DHS custody,” they said.
A senior U.S. Customs and Border Protection official said he could not comment on legal issues, but stressed that the current immigration system is not equipped to handle the influx of migrants arriving at the border. He noted that the court's ruling did not come with additional resources to make the order more feasible.
The court's latest ruling acknowledged these “realistic difficulties” but cited evidence that the agency “determined that it was capable of handling children more effectively in highly supervised settings.” said that the agency was “not processing class committee members as quickly as possible.”