Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(132,222 posts)
Wed Jun 20, 2018, 10:51 PM Jun 2018

Flores v. Meese, 507 U.S. 292 (U.S. Supreme Court 1993) IMPORTANT!

(nationwide class action case challenging INS policies for apprehended children, including the conditions of detention; national settlement reached with the U.S. Government addressing the conditions of detention, requiring the INS to (i) end commingling of detained children with unrelated adults, (ii) provide education and reading materials and visitation with friends and relatives; (iii) requiring release of detained minors in certain circumstances to unrelated responsible adults)


The Court held that the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s regulations regarding the release of alien unaccompanied minors did not violate the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution.

In 1997, after the Supreme Court remanded the matter to the District Court, the parties agreed to a consent decree in which the litigation would end once the government implemented certain standards for the detention, treatment, and release of unaccompanied alien minors. The District Court retained jurisdiction after the settlement and the case remains open and active as of June 2018.

Terms of the agreement
The Flores Agreement set national policy for the detention, release and treatment of minors in the custody of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.[14] According to the legal nonprofit Human Rights First, the Agreement "imposed several obligations on the immigration authorities, which fall into three broad categories":

The government is required to release children from immigration detention without unnecessary delay to, in order of preference, parents, other adult relatives, or licensed programs willing to accept custody.
If a suitable placement is not immediately available, the government is obligated to place children in the “least restrictive” setting appropriate to their age and any special needs.
The government must implement standards relating to the care and treatment of children in immigration detention.[15]
The Flores Agreement "set standards for the detention of minors by prioritizing them for release to the custody of their families and requiring those in federal custody to be placed in the least restrictive environment possible," according to NBC News in 2018.[16] Immigration officials agreed to provide detained minors with: . .

Subsequent history
The parties agreed the litigation would terminate once the government finalized regulations complying with the settlement. Because the government has not yet finalized any such regulations, the litigation is ongoing. . .

Trump administration family separation policy
The Flores Agreement received increased public attention in June 2018 when Republican President Donald Trump, his administration, and supporters cited the Agreement and Democratic recalcitrance as justification for the Trump administration family separation policy.'>>>


This matter is ongoing, Peter Schey, counsel for children in the matter, stated tonight, on Laurence's show. He/they have observers and fact-finders on the ground, checking the facilities as provided for in the settlement agreement.

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Flores v. Meese, 507 U.S. 292 (U.S. Supreme Court 1993) IMPORTANT! (Original Post) elleng Jun 2018 OP
Trump will need to get the Flores settlement amended to effectuate EO Gothmog Jun 2018 #1
From my twitter feed Gothmog Jun 2018 #2
Thanks. Just caught this: elleng Jun 2018 #3


(132,222 posts)
3. Thanks. Just caught this:
Wed Jun 20, 2018, 11:32 PM
Jun 2018

'The chief lawyer representing illegal immigrant children in the U.S. said Wednesday he is considering asking a court to block the deportations of any parents involved in the family separations until they can be reunited with their children.

Peter Schey said he is studying the option, and may ask a federal judge in California to impose the condition as part of the Flores Settlement, the long-standing agreement that governs how the government can treat illegal immigrant children — and by extension their parents.

“We are currently exploring whether the court in the Flores case may have the authority to block the deportation of parents until they have been reunited with their parents. We are also exploring whether the court may order the Trump administration to immediately implement a procedure to reunite children with parents who have already been deported,” Mr. Schey said in a statement he provided to The Washington Times.

Homeland Security officials said that from May 5 through June 9 some 2,342 juveniles were separated from parents who were jailed as part of the new zero tolerance policy.

The government cannot say how many of them have been reunited with their parents yet.

And lawyers say some parents were deported without their children, who were “lost” in the child detention system run by the federal Health Department.'


Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Flores v. Meese, 507 U.S....