The government’s decision to terminate Flores’ contract could leave immigrant children unprotected

The Justice Department asked the court to partially terminate a decades-old agreement protecting the rights of immigrant children earlier this month.

The government claims that Flores The settlement is no longer needed because a new Department of Health and Human Services regulation finalized on April 30 will provide sufficient protections for immigrant children in HHS care. Supporters fear the end of the agreement and decades of oversight Flores a solicitor could put children at risk.

Because the new rule applies only to HHS, the government is seeking to terminate only those parts of the agreement that apply to children in HHS care. Last December, the American Immigration Council was one of nearly 200 organizations that signed on to a set of public comments on the proposed rule, submitted on behalf of groups advocating for unaccompanied immigrant children, immigrants and people with disabilities.

What is this Flores Settlement?

The Flores The settlement arose from years of legal proceedings brought by a group of immigrant children who were detained indefinitely in inhumane conditions by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service agency. The settlement went into effect in 1997 and is currently overseen by Judge Dolly Gee of the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Together with the Trafficking Victims Reauthorization Act of 2008, it sets standards for the detention, release, and treatment of immigrant children in government custody.

One sec Flores allows the government to publish regulations implementing and replacing the agreement, the regulations must be consistent with the spirit and terms of the agreement.

What do the new regulations say?

While the new HHS regulations provide some important protections for immigrant children, such as a guarantee of access to abortion in ORR custody, supporters say they fall short in several key respects. The government argues that this rule “goes beyond” the requirements of the settlement by “necessarily adopting a modified approach in light of substantially changed circumstances since 1997.”

Under its “modified approach,” ORR will allow immigrant children to be held in unlicensed facilities in some states, provided the facilities meet state standards and pass ORR inspections. The government argues that the decision was necessary after the governors of Texas and Florida issued orders preventing their states from licensing facilities that house immigrant children in federal custody. However, state licensing is a key part of the deal, and placing children in unlicensed facilities exposes them to violence and ill-treatment.

Another important change is the creation of the Office of the Ombudsman for Unaccompanied Children under the regulation, which will enable children and other interested parties to raise concerns about ORR policies and practices. The office will also conduct field visits and publish reports. Advocates welcomed the creation of the Office of Public Defenders but fear the office has no oversight powers and will not report to Congress.

These concerns are particularly relevant because if the FSA is terminated with respect to HHS, Flores General Counsel will no longer provide critical oversight of ORR shelters through on-site visits and meetings with detained children. This can create a lack of transparency about shelter conditions and whether children’s rights are protected, especially for children detained in Florida and Texas.

Have there been any attempts to terminate the contract?

The government previously tried to terminate the agreement in 2019, after the Department of Homeland Security and HHS issued a final rule that sought to eliminate many of the agreement’s protections.

The Trump-era regulation would allow the government to independently license its own family detention centers, rather than comply with the regulations Flores the settlement’s requirement that facilities that house immigrant children be state-licensed. It would allow the government to detain immigrant families indefinitely, rather than releasing them within the 20-day deadline that applies to children held in unlicensed facilities.

Judge Gee said the 2019 regulations “largely defeated” the purpose of the agreement and blocked their entry into force. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit ruled that parts of the regulation could go into effect, but the Biden administration ultimately scrapped plans to implement the 2019 rule, leaving Flores in place of.

What happens then?

The regulations are scheduled to go into effect on July 1 unless a federal court blocks them in part or in whole. Judge Gee will decide whether the rule is sufficiently consistent with HHS’s obligations under the settlement so that the agreement can be terminated as to HHS. While the provisions represent a vast improvement over the Trump-era administration, it remains to be seen whether the court will find they can replace a critical agreement that has protected the rights of immigrant children for decades.

REGISTERED UNDER: Office of Refugee Resettlement, Unaccompanied Children