Trump said late Wednesday at the White House that the new rules showed the strength of border security while framing them as a humanitarian action. He repeated false claims that his predecessor, President Obama, was the one who began to separate immigrant families. The debate over the Flores agreement erupted last year, when the Trump administration released a policy of persecuting people caught illegally crossing the border, separating at least 2,900 children from their parents. The total number of separated children remains unknown. Correction: This article originally contained a reference to the “2015 agreement.” The agreement at issue was, as established in the sentence above, the Flores regime of 1996. The district judge overseeing the agreement has already rejected the government`s requests to increase the time children can take into custody. McAleenan would not say how long Homeland Security expects the families to be detained, but referred to an average detention period of less than 50 days, which he said preceded the strengthening of the 2015 Flores agreement. The U.S. government and the Center for Human Rights and the Human Rights Act (CHRCL) reached the Flores agreement in 1997, after lawyers filed a class action against the U.S.
government on behalf of imprisoned immigrant children in 1985. Among the complainants was a 15-year-old girl named Jenny Lisette Flores, who became the boss of the case. Flores had been held for two months in an Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) facility under substandard conditions, where she was housed next to adults and was subject to regular searches. CHRCL said the federal government, along with children of migrants like Flores, had violated its rights to a proper trial. Gee`s judgment was harsh. She called it “astounding” and “shocking” that 20 years after the Flores agreement, the government has still not figured out how to meet its own standards for the humane treatment of children. President Trump and his accomplices have long opposed the so-called Flores Agreement, the pioneering 1997 court regulation that requires the government to set a minimum standard for the custody of migrant children in U.S. custody. In 2015, when the Obama administration was struggling to respond to an influx of unaccompanied minors at the southern border, the agreement was strengthened. In general, the government must release children as soon as possible and cannot detain them for more than 20 days, whether they have been alone or with family members in the United States.
For children who could not be released, the Flores agreement required officials to house them in precarious structures run by accredited childcare institutions. Homeland security officials say the new rules reflect the agreement, which is expected to be temporary. They said they were creating a number of higher standards for family detention centres, which are regularly monitored and audits are published. But the rules would allow the government to detain families until the end of their immigration cases, which could take well over 20 days. The Trump administration`s attempt to end the Flores agreement is coming because it still holds in custody about 350 separated children who have not yet been reinstated with their parents and that Congress has not passed a legislative solution to the continuing crisis of child segregation. Immigrant rights advocates have invoked the Flores comparison to challenge the current detentions. The government argued that important parts of Flores did not apply because the children were detained with their parents. But on Friday, federal judge Dolly Gee went to the lawyers` side after months of negotiations. It decided that the government was detaining children in unlicensed, prison-like facilities, which was contrary to the 1996 agreement. Under the control of the U.S.
District Court of the Central District of California, the Clinton administration