District Court Judge Denounces Forced Child Separation

Over the past month, the Trump administration has begun to implement a policy that has reportedly led to the forced separation of hundreds of undocumented immigrant parents from their children after they’ve arrived together at the U.S. border. This followed reports that a pilot program of such a policy had been undertaken between July and November 2017. Democrats have argued that this apparent practice is cruel, heartless, and betrays our nation’s deepest values. The ACLU, meanwhile, has argued in court on behalf of separated immigrant families that such a practice would be—and is—blatantly unconstitutional.

On Wednesday, Dana Sabraw, a federal district court judge in California, issued a stinging rebuke to the government’s request to dismiss the ACLU’s claim under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. He also indicated in his opinion that the government would likely be found to be in violation of the due process rights of these immigrant families. Judge Sabraw resoundingly rejected the argument that the Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment had not been violated. (Sabraw, a George W. Bush appointee, at the same time accepted the government’s motion to dismiss the ACLU’s statutory grounds arguments.)

Source
Further Reading

I know, I know, we have numerous threads on this topic already. That said these are the only cases going on that I'm aware of in relation to this issue and I don't see anyone talking about them.

I've noticed a number of people claim that people legally seeking asylum have not been separated from their children but as we can see from that case of Ms. L that's clearly not the case. I've also see people claim that murderers and rapists lose their children when they're arrested but since when is a misdemeanor grounds for losing your child? Ms. C still hasn't had her child returned despite being granted asylum.

It's easy to try to justify this new policy by pretending all the families being separated include felons or child traffickers but that simply isn't the case. We can see from the cases of Ms. C and Ms. L, we can see from the numerous affidavits, that the government are separating families that are doing nothing more than trying to escape the terrible conditions of their home country and giving their children a life.

The government insists the new zero tolerance policy is not designed to separate families like this. At the same time when we look at previous statements from people like Kelley and Sessions, that's exactly what this new policy was designed to do regardless of whether a family is seeking asylum.

The ACLU has called this new policy out for being a violation of the Asylum Act. The UN has stated that it is a violation of human rights. And now we have a (Bush appointed) judge claiming that it is brutal and unconstitutional. While no official legal decision has been made yet it seems like only a matter of time before the Trump administration is once again slapped down by the courts over their immigration policy.

While I don't expect this to change anyone's mind I am hopeful that it will open some eyes to what's actually going on at America's borders. Legitimate families are being broken up for no other reason to dissuade people from coming here regardless of if they're seeking asylum or not.

a reply to: Xcalibur254


So a District Judge you say? You do know what a district judge is right? Anyhow any judge who advocated violating our immigration laws should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Their job is to uphold the law not interpret it.

Also, if Trump used his pen to change this wouldn't that make him an "Imperialist" a "Dictator"? This is the job of Congress to change our immigration law, not for Trump to use his pen!

Using the ACLU for a source doesn't help your cause any, since they are one of the NGO's sending people down to coach these people on how to scam the asylum system and also supplying lawyers for these law breakers. ACLU needs to take the American out of their name. They are far from representing our values and Constitutional Republic.

Also using Slate for a source if very poor form for this subject considering they tried to normalize pedophilia.

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee said this ........ in 2014

Link

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee tried to calm some of this anger by having a private conversation with Lancelin. Whatever was said between the two did not last, because Lancelin later interrupted Lee's news conference with a question. "What's going to keep them from escaping here and just moving around? Around Houston, around Trinity Gardens? What's going to keep them behind these gates? Security, really? They can't even control the border," said Lancelin. Lee said she understands residents' concerns, but argues the law prohibits children from being detained with adults and at the current time detention centers along the border, and at military installations, are maxed out. "They are on the floors in facilities that are not child friendly," said Lee. "They are children without their families, they are children." Lee said no decision has been made as to whether Terrell will be used as a temporary shelter, how many children could be housed at the campus or for how long. "They have no status, they have no ability to receive status, they will be deported," said Lee. Lee added that deportation is a process that takes time. "One of our responsibilities is when they are unaccompanied is that they have to be deported to something," said Lee. "I think the main concern that many of us in the federal government have is the fact that we must determine whether there's been human trafficking, rape or abuse because they are underage."

but since when is a misdemeanor grounds for losing your child?

a reply to: seeker1963

There are plenty of misdemeanors that will land you in jail... do you get to bring your kids to jail with you? no? didn't think so. end of story. turn off CNN and their 24/7 tear jerking sob stories.

the fact of the matter is the parents committed a crime worth of jail time. and their kids don't get to go to jail with them. just like every other country in the world for all of human history.

Sounds like some Judges are politically biased.

👋🤦

a reply to: Xcalibur254

This judge seems incompetent. Everyone needs to read the release from the DHS. The supreme court and lower courts have made these decisions.

There is only 1 legal option for each and every situation. Is it possible that some cases may end up being handled wrong? Of course, but that has nothing to so with what the DHS, ICE and border patrol are doing and are required to do by law.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.dhs.gov...

The POTUS can't even EO this. He would be directly challenging the Supreme Court. Something he does not have the constitutional power to do.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Anyone know why the judge didn't issue an injunction to stop this policy like with the travel ban event?

No worries.
Trump says he is going to be signing something - by law or executive order.

This will be fixed shortly, and the Dems will need to think up another big scary emergence to deflect from the FBI/DOJ scandal.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

www.dhs.gov...

Myth DHS has a policy to separate families at the border.

Fact DHS does not have a blanket policy of separating families at the border. However, DHS does have a responsibility to protect all minors in our custody. This means DHS will separate adults and minors under certain circumstances. These circumstances include: 1) when DHS is unable to determine the familial relationship, 2) when DHS determines that a child may be at risk with the parent or legal guardian, or 3) when the parent or legal guardian is referred for criminal prosecution. Familial Relationship – If there is reason to question the claimed familial relationship between an adult and child, it is not appropriate to detain adults and children together. Human Trafficking and Smuggling – If there is reason to suspect the purported parent or legal guardian of human trafficking or smuggling, DHS detains the adult in an appropriate, secure detection facility, separate from the minor. DHS continues to see instances and intelligence reports indicating minors are trafficked by unrelated adults, posing as a “family” in an effort to avoid detention. Safety Risk – If there is reason to suspect the purported parent or legal guardian poses a safety risk to the child (e.g. suspected child abuse), it is not appropriate to maintain the adult and child together. Criminal Prosecution – If an adult is referred for criminal prosecution, the adult will be transferred to U.S. Marshals Service custody and any children will be classified as an unaccompanied alien child and transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services custody.

The democrats hit the jackpot with this babies in cages issue. It's not going away anytime soon.

Now even fox is going up against the "boss"...

www.foxnews.com...

Trump caved to the GOP trying to save 18....

originally posted by: olaru12
The democrats hit the jackpot with this babies in cages issue. It's not going away anytime soon.

Now even fox is going up against the "boss"...

No. They are not going against Trump.

They are going against the Supreme Court and Lower Courts decisions. If they don't like the laws they need to attack Congress.

POTUS cannot make an EO that goes against a Supreme Court rulling.

Read and get educated. www.dhs.gov...

The media keeps using the "zero tolerance" buzzword.

Yes I want a president that follows our constitution and rullings from our Supreme Court and Lower Courts 100% of the time. If they don't we should impeach them.

If the media is too stupid to figure this out I imagine that's just business as usual for the MSM.

a reply to: seeker1963

I know that case go to the District Court before anything else. So of course it would a District Judge hearing this case in District Court. Also, since when is going to a port of entry and requesting asylum a violation of our immigration law?

As for using the ACLU as a source, is it now frowned upon to use a primary source on this site? I mean they are the ones representing the plaintiff.

a reply to: MetalThunder

Your quote might be relevant if these children were unaccompanied. But they're accompanied and thanks to the zero tolerance policy enacted in April they're being turned in to unaccompanied minors.

a reply to: smkymcnugget420

Last time I checked if you get charged with a misdemeanor only to have the courts decide at a later date they were wrong you get your child back.

a reply to: seeker1963

Skin color scala

I'm around 20 (light intermediate, or dark-skinned European), in summertime 25 maybe 27 (dark intermediate or "olive skin"). Interesting!

a reply to: Isurrender73

If the media is too stupid to figure this out I imagine that's just business as usual for the MSM.

The media knows exactly what the people want to hear. It is just business as usual and this story get viewers, thus market shares and advertising. The Fox demographic is just slightly different, but they still play to spin and emotions. News is very competitive...Capitalism in action!!

a reply to: Isurrender73

What law specifically states that ICE needs to separate the families of everyone that comes to the border?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

And just because someone walks across the border with a child does not make them family .....

a reply to: network dude

The government originally tried using the Human Trafficking Prevention Act in this case. It has since become a footnote in their argument.

a reply to: Isurrender73

The Flores Settlement mentions nothing about separating families.