217 days and counting: Trump's rules slow the release of migrant children to their families
WASHINGTON (AP) — Dressed in a pink pullover, the 17-year-old girl rested her head in her hands, weighing her bleak options from the empty room of an shelter in Poughkeepsie, New York.
During a video call into an immigration courtroom in Manhattan, she listened as a lawyer explained to a judge how new regulations imposed by President Donald Trump's administration — for DNA testing, income verification and more — have hobbled efforts to reunite with her parents in the U.S. for more than 70 days.
As the administration's aggressive efforts to curtail migration have taken shape, including unparalleled removals of men to prisons in other countries, migrant children are being separated for long periods from the relatives they had hoped to live with after crossing into the U.S.
Under the Trump rules, migrant children have stayed in shelters an average of 217 days before being released last month to family members, according to new data from the Health and Human Services Department's Office of Refugee Resettlement. During the Biden administration, migrant children spent an average of 35 days in shelters before being released to relatives.
'Collectively, these policy changes have resulted in children across the country being separated from their loving families, while the government denies their release, unnecessarily prolonging their detention,' lawyers for the National Center for Youth Law argued in court documents submitted May 8.
The Trump administration, however, has argued that the new rules will ensure the children are put in safe homes and prevent traffickers from illegally bringing children into the country.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. the health secretary, told lawmakers in Congress this month: 'Nobody gets a kid without showing that they are a family member.'
The family situation for the 17-year-old, and her 14-year-old brother who came with her from the Dominican Republic, is complicated. Their parents, who were living apart, were already in the U.S. Their children were trying to reunite with them to leave behind a problematic living situation with a stepmother in their home country.
After 70 days in detention, the teen girl seemed to wonder if she would ever get back to her mother or father in the U.S. If she agreed to leave America, she asked the judge, how quickly would she be sent back to her home country?
'Pretty soon,' the judge said, before adding: 'It doesn't feel nice to be in that shelter all the time.'
The siblings, whom the Associated Press agreed not to identify at the request of their mother and because they are minors, are not alone. Thousands of children have made the trek from Guatemala, Haiti, Mexico and other countries, often alone on the promise of settling with a family member already in the U.S.
They've faced longer waits in federal custody as officials perform DNA testing, verify family members' incomes and inspect homes before releasing the children. The new rules also require adults who sponsor children to provide U.S.-issued identification.
The federal government only released 45 children to sponsors last month, even as more than 2,200 children remained in their custody.
Child stays in shelter as Trump requires DNA testing
Under the Biden administration, officials tried to release children to eligible adult sponsors within 30 days, reuniting many families quickly. But the approach also yielded errors, with some children being released to adults who forced them to work illegally, or to people who provided clearly false identification and addresses.
Trump's Republican administration has said its requirements will prevent children from being placed in homes where they may be at risk for abuse or exploited for child labor. Officials are conducting a review of 65,000 'notices of concerns' that were submitted to the federal government involving thousands of children who were placed with adult sponsors since 2023.
Already, the Justice Department indicted a man on allegations he enticed a 14-year-old girl to travel from Guatemala to the U.S., then falsely claimed she was his sister to gain custody as her sponsor.
DNA testing and ID requirements for child protection are taking time
Immigration advocacy groups have sued the Trump administration seeking to block the more rigorous requirements on behalf of parents and adult siblings who are waiting to bring migrant children into their homes.
'We have a lot of children stuck ... simply because they are awaiting DNA testing,' immigration lawyer Tatine Darker, of Church World Service, told the Manhattan judge as she sat next to the Dominican girl.
Five other children appeared in court that day from shelters in New York and New England, all saying they experienced delays in being released to their relatives.
The Trump administration's latest guidance on DNA testing says the process generally takes at least two weeks, when accounting for case review and shipping results.
But some relatives have waited a month or longer just to get a test, said Molly Chew, a legal aide at Vecina. The organization is ending its work supporting guardians in reunification because of federal funding cuts and other legal and political challenges to juvenile immigration programs. DNA Diagnostics Centers, which is conducting the tests for the federal government, did not respond to a request for comment.
Plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit filed by the National Center for Youth Law have also cataloged long wait times and slow DNA results. One mother in Florida said she had been waiting at least a month just to get a DNA appointment, according to testimony submitted to the court.
Another mother waited three weeks for results. But by the time those came through in April, the Trump administration introduced a new rule that required her to provide pay stubs she doesn't have. She filed bank statements instead. Her children were released 10 weeks after her application was submitted, according to court documents filed Tuesday.
Many parents living in the U.S. without work authorization do not have income documents or U.S. identification documents, like visas or driver's licenses.
The siblings being held at the Poughkeepsie shelter are in that conundrum, said Darker, the New York immigration lawyer. They crossed the U.S.-Mexico border in March with their 25-year-old sister and her children, who were quickly deported.
Their mother said she moved to New Jersey a few years ago to earn money to support them. She couldn't meet the new income reporting requirements. Their father, also from the Dominican Republic, lives in Boston and agreed to take them. But the DNA testing process has taken weeks. The AP could not reach him for comment.
She said her children are downcast and now simply want to return to the Dominican Republic.
'My children are going to return because they can't take it anymore,' the mother said in Spanish. She noted that her children will have been in the shelter three months on Sunday.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
25 minutes ago
- Fox News
Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'
FIRST ON FOX: Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., on Wednesday will introduce legislation that would ban congressional stock trading, serving as the House companion bill to Sen. Josh Hawley's, R-Mo., "PELOSI Act" in the Senate. Alford's proposed bill would ban lawmakers and their spouses from holding, purchasing or selling individual stocks while in office, but it allows investments in diversified mutual funds, exchange-traded funds or U.S. Treasury bonds. If passed, current lawmakers would have 180 days to comply with the legislation. Likewise, newly elected lawmakers must achieve compliance within 180 days of entering office. "As public servants, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard and avoid the mere appearance of corruption," Alford said in a statement. "Unfortunately, too many members of Congress are engaging in suspicious stock trades based on non-public information to enrich themselves." "These gross violations of the public trust make clear: we must finally take action to ban members and their spouses from owning or selling individual stocks," he added. Under the proposed legislation, lawmakers who continue to make wrongful transactions would be required to hand over any profits they made to the U.S. Treasury Department. The House or Senate ethics committees could also impose a fine on such lawmakers amounting to 10% of each wrongful transaction. House Speaker Mike Johnson endorsed a stock trading ban on Wednesday, saying "a few bad actors" have ruined Americans' trust in lawmakers on the issue. "You want me to tell you my honest opinion on that? I'm in favor of that, because I don't think we should have any appearance of impropriety here," he told reporters during a press conference. President Donald Trump himself endorsed the same ban for members of Congress in an interview with Time magazine last month. "I watched Nancy Pelosi get rich through insider information, and I would be okay with it. If they send that to me, I would do it," he said of a trading ban. "You'll sign it?" the reporter pressed. "Absolutely," Trump responded. Democrats in the House of Representatives have also expressed support for a ban, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., throwing his weight behind the proposal last week.


Associated Press
26 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Inflation data threatened by government hiring freeze as tariffs loom
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Labor Department has cut back on the inflation data it collects because of the Trump administration's government hiring freeze, raising concerns among economists about the quality of the inflation figures just as they are being closely watched for the impact of tariffs. The department's Bureau of Labor Statistics, which produces the monthly consumer price index, the most closely watched inflation measure, said Wednesday that it is 'reducing sample in areas across the country' and stopped collecting price data entirely in April in Lincoln, Nebraska, and Provo, Utah. It also said it has stopped collecting data this month in Buffalo, New York. In an email that the BLS sent to economists, viewed by The Associated Press, the agency said that it 'temporarily reduced the number of outlets and quotes it attempted to collect due to a staffing shortage' in April. The reduced data collection 'will be kept in place until the hiring freeze is lifted.' President Donald Trump froze federal hiring on his first day in office and extended the freeze in April until late July, suggesting future inflation reports will also involve less data collection. The cutbacks have intensified worries among economists that government spending cuts could degrade the federal government's ability to compile key economic data on employment, prices, and the broader economy. The BLS also said last month that it will no longer collect wholesale prices in about 350 categories for its Producer Price Index, a measure of price changes before they reach the consumer. The cutbacks are also occurring at a time of heightened uncertainty about the economy and the impact of Trump's sweeping tariffs on hiring, growth and inflation. 'The PPI is cutting hundreds of indexes from production, and the CPI is now being constructed with less data,' Omair Sharif, chief economist at the consulting firm Inflation Insights, said in an email. 'That alone is worrying given that we're heading into the teeth of the tariff impact on prices.' Earlier this year, the Trump administration disbanded several advisory committees that worked with BLS and other statistical agencies on fine-tuning its data-gathering. The BLS said that the cutbacks 'have minimal impact' on the overall inflation data, but 'they may increase the volatility' of the reported prices of specific items. Alan Detmeister, an economist at UBS, an investment bank, said the cutbacks likely had little impact on April's inflation figures. But 'if these types of cuts continue, they will degrade the reliability and efficacy of these statistical agencies,' he said.


CBS News
26 minutes ago
- CBS News
Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map
Less than a day after Tarrant County commissioners approved a controversial redistricting proposal, a group of citizens filed a lawsuit claiming intentional discrimination. According to the Lone Star Project, the lawsuit claims that Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare and his followers engaged in intentional racial discrimination in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution by drawing the new district lines. "Intentional discrimination is still against the law," said lead legal counsel for the citizen plaintiffs, Chad Dunn. "The map they drew, the process they used to draw it, and the animosity shown to the citizens of Tarrant County violate the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution." Hundreds of residents speak out for, against the redistricting More than 200 people spoke out about redrawing boundary lines during public comment Tuesday night. The majority who spoke were against redistricting, including the mayors of Arlington, Mansfield and Forest Hills. There were still several speakers who expressed their support. Several used the phrase "don't Dallas my Tarrant." Tarrant County "I want to say that I fully support deterring redistricting efforts. These lines haven't been updated since 2010," said Carlos Turcios, the community development committee chairman for the Tarrant Republican Party. Commissioners moved into executive session around 3 p.m. on Tuesday after some tense moments between the two Democrats and the three Republicans. As Commissioner Alisa Simmons expressed all the reasons she is against redistricting, Judge Tim O'Hare abruptly moved to executive session in an effort to limit her comments. O'Hare is spearheading this process and has been clear that it's about partisan politics. He wants another Republican seat on the court to ensure conservative leadership for the next decade. "It's a very divided country and the parties, I'm not sure, have never been further apart in their beliefs," O'Hare said. "I don't apologize for being a Republican. I don't apologize for being a conservative." "It's not partisan. It is racism." Critics believe the redistricting is racial gerrymandering, saying it goes beyond partisan politics and say it dilutes the voting power of minorities. "Absolutely, it's not partisan. It is racism," Simmons said during the meeting. The new map does appear to take areas with high Black and brown populations from precinct two and put them in precinct one. SMU political science professor Calvin Jillson said what the court did is not unusual, but the legality of the new lines comes down to intentions. "Oh, this absolutely gerrymandering – it is the redrawing of electoral boundaries for partisan purposes," Jillson said. "The question is whether the purposes behind the redrawing were actually political, in which case gerrymandering is legal, or racial discrimination, in which case it would not be legal." Check out more on the CBS News Texas YouTube page: contributed to this report.