Judge denies Trump administration request to end a policy protecting
immigrant children in custody
[August 16, 2025]
By VALERIE GONZALEZ
McALLEN, Texas (AP) — A federal judge ruled Friday to deny the Trump
administration's request to end a policy in place for nearly three
decades that is meant to protect immigrant children in federal custody.
U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles issued her ruling a week
after holding a hearing with the federal government and legal advocates
representing immigrant children in custody.
Gee called last week's hearing “déjà vu” after reminding the court of
the federal government's attempt to terminate the Flores Settlement
Agreement in 2019 under the first Trump administration. She repeated the
sentiment in Friday's order.
“There is nothing new under the sun regarding the facts or the law. The
Court therefore could deny Defendants’ motion on that basis alone," Gee
wrote, referring to the government's appeal to a law they believed kept
the court from enforcing the agreement.
In the most recent attempt, the government argued they made substantial
changes since the agreement was formalized in 1997, creating standards
and policies governing the custody of immigrant children that conform to
legislation and the agreement.
Gee acknowledged that the government made some improved conditions of
confinement, but wrote, “These improvements are direct evidence that the
FSA is serving its intended purpose, but to suggest that the agreement
should be abandoned because some progress has been made is nonsensical.”
Attorneys representing the federal government told the court the
agreement gets in the way of their efforts to expand detention space for
families, even though Trump’s tax and spending bill provided billions to
build new immigration facilities.
Tiberius Davis, one of the government attorneys, said the bill gives the
government authority to hold families in detention indefinitely. “But
currently under the Flores Settlement Agreement, that’s essentially
void,” he said last week.
The Flores agreement, named for a teenage plaintiff, was the result of
over a decade of litigation between attorneys representing the rights of
migrant children and the U.S. government over widespread allegations of
mistreatment in the 1980s.
[to top of second column]
|
Immigrants play soccer at a new U.S. government holding center
for migrant children in Carrizo Springs, Texas, July 9, 2019. (AP
Photo/Eric Gay, File)
The agreement set standards for how licensed shelters must provide
food, water, adult supervision, emergency medical services, toilets,
sinks, temperature control and ventilation. It also limited how long
U.S. Customs and Border Protection could detain child immigrants to
72 hours. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services then
takes custody of the children.
The Biden administration successfully pushed to partially end the
agreement last year. Gee ruled that special court supervision may
end when HHS takes custody, but she carved out exceptions for
certain types of facilities for children with more acute needs.
In arguing against the Trump administration’s effort to completely
end the agreement, advocates said the government was holding
children beyond the time limits. In May, CBP held 46 children for
over a week, including six children held for over two weeks and four
children held 19 days, according to data revealed in a court filing.
In March and April, CPB reported that it had 213 children in custody
for more than 72 hours. That included 14 children, including
toddlers, who were held for over 20 days in April.
The federal government is looking to expand its immigration
detention space, including by building more centers like one in
Florida dubbed “ Alligator Alcatraz,” where a lawsuit alleges
detainees’ constitutional rights are being violated.
Gee still has not ruled on the request by legal advocates for the
immigrant children to expand independent monitoring of the treatment
of children held in U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities.
Currently, the agreement allows for third-party inspections at
facilities in the El Paso and Rio Grande Valley regions, but
plaintiffs submitted evidence showing long detention times at border
facilities that violate the agreement's terms.
All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
