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

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

elleng

(131,798 posts)
Wed Jun 20, 2018, 10:51 PM Jun 2018

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

(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)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reno_v._Flores

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.'>>>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reno_v._Flores#1997_settlement_agreement

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