In a court filing on Thursday, the Trump administration asserts that the policy has grown to be one of the biggest opportunities for unlawful immigration and a hindrance to successful border enforcement. It is also a new effort to repeal the decades-old Reyes Settlement Agreement.
The consent order, which has been in place since 1997, was amended by the Department of Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, and the Department of Homeland Security. The action contends that the Flores agreement is ineffective, archaic, and has “obsessed” U.S. immigration policy by requiring the government to either release families in large numbers or divide them.
A top DHS official told the Washington Examiner,” The Flores consent order has been a device of the Left to encourage an open borders agenda for times.” ” A single area in California must stop directing the Executive Branch’s immigration features,” said the director. Our immigration system will soon be able to use common sense, according to the Trump presidency.
Major media outlets like the Associated Press referred to the registration as a “plan to end protections for immigrant children in national custody” after it was released on the open court docket. However, in reality, ending the Flores arrangement could lead to fewer mysterious families who have been taken into Customs and Border Protection’s care.
U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee, who has presided over the case for years and has recently blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to prosecute families for longer than 20 days and avoid separating children from their parents in prison, will hear the action to dissolve Flores at a July 18 reading reading.
The court-barriered settlement attempt was President Donald Trump’s most direct attempt to end it, which he also attempted to end in the latter part of his first term. Administration officials believe the right time is now, however, given the new regulatory framework and the conservative judiciary‘s transformation in Trump’s first four years.
Since the settlement was signed, the administration’s 67-page filing highlights several changes in law and policy, including the implementation of federal standards of care for migrant children. According to officials, these developments render the settlement unneeded and constitutional.
The DOJ further asserts that the courts have oversteppedstepped their authority to extend the Flores decree, particularly by enforcing it in relation to families with children rather than its original intention to target Unaccompanied Alien Children, a class of aliens that has experienced a steep decline since Trump’s return to power.
” Over the years, millions of people have been enrolled in this class. The FSA, which was originally intended to address a very limited set of specific circumstances, has been interpreted as addressing the custody of all minors at all stages, the government wrote in court documents on Thursday.
Conservative border hawks have long pointed out that smugglers frequently use the agreement’s 20-day detention cap for children to secure quick release for entire families. They have blamed Flores for the rise in family migration. Nearly a million family unit encounters at the southern border have been documented in the administration’s motion, according to data cited in the motion.
Liberal immigration attorneys vehemently disagree, with one organization filing an opposition brief claiming the administration” strips migrant children of their last remaining legal protections.” However, according to critics, those attorneys are merely trying to control immigration policy because many of them pay taxpayer-funded fees through court orders.
According to DOJ officials, the legal landscape has dramatically changed in recent years. They contend that the Supreme Court’s decision in Garland v. Aleman Gonzalez, a crucial component of their legal strategy, undermines the court’s authority to carry out Flores in its present form.
It is time for this case to end, the government wrote in the letter.” After 40 years of litigation and 28 years of judicial control over a crucial component of U.S. immigration policy, it is time for this case to end.”
If the court consents, the Trump administration could put long-term family detention into effect while still keeping families connected and potentially avoiding the criticisms of his first term, when Democrats erupted over instances where migrant children were forced to leave their parents, all because of the long-standing agreement that required those separations.
Senate Investigation into Unaccompanied Child Smuggling Results in Major “FAILURES” UNDER BIDEN.
In the meantime, DHS has praised recent data that demonstrate how much the administration has worked toward its goal of preventing the immigrant population from entering the country. In contrast to the 18, 716 UACs recorded in March 2021 under former President Joe Biden, a data sheet released exclusively to the Washington Examiner last month revealed that the U.S. Border Patrol only encountered 631 UACs in March.
One of the most significant immigration policy decisions in a long time could be made in the July hearing. In its second term, it might also be a significant test for the Trump administration’s resolve to reform border security.
