In a motion filed in federal court in Los Angeles, Trump DOJ is working to resolve the “Flores Consent Judgment.” Attorney General Pam Bondy argues that the order encourages illegal immigration at the southern border.
The Flores Order has controlled the detention and release of immigrant children since 1997. The motion submitted by the DOJ and jointly filed by the HHS and the Department of Homeland Security calls for federal courts in Southern California to dissolve the decree.
Biden-appointed federal judge continues to block Trump administrators from fundraising for lawyers for immigrant children
However, claims to end the Flores order will be heard at a July 18 hearing before US District Judge Dorisey in Los Angeles. Judge Gee has been the main side of the case for many years, and it is unlikely that she would agree to remove the Flores order and set up a fight before the federal court of appeals and, ultimately, the Supreme Court.
Attorney General Pam Bondy argues that the order encourages illegal immigration at the southern border. (Anna Money Maker)
“The outdated Flores consent ruling was implemented as a halt almost 30 years ago, but in recent years it has directly encouraged illegal immigration at our southern border. Congress and various federal agencies have already settled what this consent order is designed to be amended.
Federal judge backs Trump administrators and delays firing MS-13 leaders' case
DOJ officials also told Fox News that it would be to bring strength back to the hands of elected officials in Washington, rather than a single federal judge in California.
In the DOJ submission, the government says that “the government is moving to complete the FSA, in relation to all defendants, and to dissolve the court's injunction in the regulation of DHS on the arrest, disposal, care and custody of foreign minors.
DOJ officials also told Fox News that it would be to bring strength back to the hands of elected officials in Washington, rather than a single federal judge in California. (Ting Shen/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Filing details:
Further continuance of the FSA, including the promulgation of regulations incorporating the FSA goals, is no longer in the fair or public interest, including the Supreme Court precedent that contradicts the continued long-term order in light of significant changes in the situation.
Trump Dozi drops Biden-era legal challenges on the Texas Border Patrol Act
The court entered the FSA as a consent judgment in 1997 and revised it in December 2001. The FSA controls the care and custody of unaccompanied foreign children (UACs) despite the U.S. Congress and agency-regulated intervention laws. In 2015, the court expanded to children accompanying the FSA. It is clear from the terms of the FSA that the parties did not consider inclusion, but Floresv. See Lynch, 828 F.3d 898, 906, 909 (9thCir. 2016). Therefore, with regard to children accompanying, national policy has long been set up by district courts by district courts (not presidents or parliament), despite the fact that consent decisions providing the basis for district court oversight do not argue that they regulate foreigners of this class. That simply cannot be done.
Judge Gee has been the main side of the case for many years, and it is unlikely that she would agree to remove the Flores order and set up a fight before the federal court of appeals and, ultimately, the Supreme Court. (Drew Anger/Getty Images)
Over the 28 years the court has managed federal policies regarding the custody of foreign children in the United States without immigration status, a huge fundamental change has occurred. The surge in foreigners has entered the country across the southwest border, including a large group that voluntarily surrendered to border patrols. The demographics of foreigners arriving at borders have shifted to include significantly more numbers from countries outside the Western Hemisphere, with more children. The global pandemic has required governments to use exile authorities to protect public health. And subsequent lifting of the policy led to a dramatic change in immigration policy for over two years.
The FSA postponed federal immigration policy, leading executives were unable to fully and meaningfully respond to these changes.
Click here to get the Fox News app
Successive governments have tried not to free themselves from the consent law and the gloss constraints of this court. But the juvenile alien detention continues as it was more than a generation, as controlled by the constraints of the 1997 agreement.
