Policy of separating children spurs ACLU lawsuit

TimesLedger Newspapers
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Don’t miss our updates:

A controversial practice by Immigration Customs Enforcement made national headlines as the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit against the agency for separating mothers and children detained at the border in a policy the ACLU has panned as having “no legitimate purpose.”

The plaintiff in the case, a Congolese woman, was detained in San Diego, while her 7-year-old child was sent 2,000 miles away to a detention center for unaccompanied minors in Illinois. She had been seeking asylum, citing violence and potential danger to her life in the Congo, although the agency has not confirmed the detention was related to a policy change. The ACLU has also charged the Trump administration with illegally imprisoning asylum seekers and failing to oversee ICE’s enforcement actions.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security denied the widespread use of this practice, but has indicated that it may separate children if it believes there are potential “smuggling and trafficking activities,” according to a Homeland official. The ACLU has disputed that the agency is using discretion and has insinuated that the move is punitive, intended to deter potential border crossings and asylum seekers.

Last year marked the lowest level of apprehensions at the southern border in 17 years. Though trending downward, a slight uptick in apprehensions in November spurred the Trump administration to consider adopting this hard-line policy, first mentioned late last year. Previously, entire families were detained together, pending an enforcement action. Under the new policy, the children would either be considered unaccompanied minors or placed with a “sponsor” – a relative that immigration authorities would have to authorize to care for the child while the parents remain in detention.

The immigration enforcement mechanism in the United States has always been subject to poor oversight, largely operating in secrecy.

According to the ACLU, 83 percent of people deported in 2013 were not granted a hearing before a judge.

In 2016, the agency’s budget swelled to $6.2 billion dollars, as the agency expanded facilities to accommodate more beds for detainees.

A wave of unaccompanied minors from Central America fleeing gang and drug-related violence caused a brief panic in 2014, resulting in some cities, such as New York, developing resources to accommodate and resettle them.

Other localities faced protests from irate citizens who believed allowing the children to remain rewarded them and the parents who had sent them on the dangerous journey. In the past 15 years, the Office of Refugee Resettlement has administered to the needs of 175,000 children, including resettlement for those who arrived without guardians.

The federal government must immediately explain the scope and criteria used to separate children from “family units” that arrive at the border. Through there are valid human trafficking concerns, the onus is on the government to prove this rather than applying a cruel preventative measure. At face value, the policy appears to be a punitive measure to punish border crossers, consistent with the nationalist goals of the Trump administration and its outright hostility to immigration.

It is a testament to the normalization of anti-immigration rhetoric that a policy most Americans would once think unthinkable and unnecessarily cruel would come into practice. The United States already has an ugly history of separating Native American children from families – with disastrous results. The modern parallels to this policy are apparent.

The mother in the ACLU lawsuit was later released, but there is no indication yet that her child has been released from custody.

Posted 12:00 am, March 23, 2018
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Don’t miss our updates:

Reader feedback

all from queens says:
Deport the whole family
March 23, 4:18 pm
Nope from Queens says:
Why do we have to be responsible for other countries problems? If we took in every single person who wanted to come in here seeking "asylum" then that would make like half the world eligible for "asylum". Why do taxpayers have to pick up the bill for other countries people? Why dont other countries politicians stop being so damn corrupt and help their citizens. Its very exhausting as a taxpayer to keep having to foot the bill for others. This woman is coming here, not knowing one word of English, probably has little to no job skills and yet we have to pay for her and her kid to stay here? They will be put into a shelter (as if we dont have enough homeless in shelters as it is), pay for her and her child to get Medicaid and pay her welfare and foostamps all because her OWN country doesn't want to fix their problems? Maybe other countries should start stepping into the 21st century and stop living in the dark ages and start realizing they need to help their OWN citizens.
How many of our OWN USA CITIZENS are out there living on the streets? How many of our OWN veterans need our help? How many of our OWN citizens need job placement help? How many of our OWN elderly people can't even afford their medications? Why doesn't the USA take care of your OWN backyard before helping someone else's?!
March 24, 7:07 pm
Why?? from Queens says:
if you are located in Africa, why didn't she try to seem asylum in another surrounding country? Or atleast in a country in Africa like south africa?
March 24, 7:19 pm

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.


Keep it local!

Stay in touch with your community. Subscribe to our free newsletter: