Trump Administration Plans to Scrap Agreement That Prevents Indefinite Detention of Children

The move to terminate the Flores settlement agreement will almost certainly be challenged in court.

Detained immigrant children line up at the Karnes family detention center in Texas in 2014.Eric Gay/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The Trump administration is planning to withdraw from a decades-old settlement agreement that prevents it from keeping children in family detention for more than about 20 days. The proposed rule announced on Thursday would allow the Department of Homeland Security to detain thousands of families indefinitely while their immigration cases proceed, although it is almost certain to be challenged in court.

The 1997 Flores settlement agreement requires the government to hold children in state-licensed child care facilities. The governmentā€™s three family detention centers do not meet that standard. As a result, Dolly Gee, the federal judge who oversees the Flores agreement, ruled in 2015 that the government must release children from family detention centers after about 20 days. Her decision was later upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Trump administration wants to circumvent Flores’ state-licensing requirement by creating an ā€œalternativeā€ federal licensing scheme. That would allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement to operate what the government claims would be Flores-compliant family detention centers where families can be held indefinitely.

The proposed rule states that DHS is aware that its plan could result in longer detention times for children, but DHS is unaware of ā€œhow much longer individuals may be detained.ā€ As a result, it is unable to estimate how much the plan will cost.

The proposed rule does not take effect immediately, and the public will have 60 days to comment on it once it is published in the federal register on Friday. If the rule is challenged in court, the case would be heard by Gee. 

The announcement from DHS and the Department of Health and Human Services comes less than three months after President Donald Trump issued an executive order to end his family separation policy. That order put the administration in a bind, since ICE could not hold parents indefinitely without separating them from their children. The administration did not want to return to the old practice of releasing families while they were awaiting hearings, but Flores prevented it from holding children with their parents for more than about three weeks. The proposed rule emphasizes the importance of “keeping families together” during their immigration cases. 

Wendy Young, the president of the advocacy group Kids in Need of Defense, said in a statement that children and adults have suffered “horrific treatment” in federal custody for decades. “It is outrageous that, after tearing thousands of children from their parents, the Administration is focused not on their reunification but on condemning other children to harsh treatment,” she said.

Trumpā€™s executive order ending family separation asked Gee to amend the Flores agreement to allow for indefinite definition. She quickly rejected that request. ā€œDefendants seek to light a match to the Flores Agreement and ask this Court to upend the partiesā€™ agreement by judicial fiat,” she wrote.

It is unclear why she would be more sympathetic to the governmentā€™s alternative licensing plan. But the timing of the public comment period, which ends on the day of the November midterm elections, could help fulfill Trumpā€™s goal of keeping immigration on the minds of his base voters in the lead-up to the elections.

DHS states that the rule will not cause most detained children to spend any additional time in family detention. That is because migrants who cross the border without authorization are eligible to be released on bond by an immigration judge if they pass a credible fear interview that establishes a ā€œsignificant possibilityā€ of persecution in their home country. Of the roughly 17,000 children at family detention centers who went through the credible fear process in the last fiscal year, about 89 percent passed, according to the text of the proposed rule. About 99 percent of those children were released from detention. The rules state that 20,606 children were sent to family detention centers that year.

The rule would primarily affect children who do not pass credible fear interviews or those whose parents have outstanding deportation orders. DHS estimates that about 2,787 children would have been detained longer in 2017 because of the rule.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate