
Exclusive: Trump administration moves to rapidly deport migrant children, asking teens if they want to leave
The latest directive, which comes as the administration seeks to ramp up deportations, marks a departure from long-standing protocol which required that federal authorities turn over most unaccompanied children to the Health and Human Services Department, the agency charged with their care. Up until now, federal authorities didn't ask unaccompanied kids from countries other than Mexico and Canada if they wanted to self deport.
This week, US Customs and Border Protection personnel were directed to ask children they encounter in immigration enforcement operations across the country whether they want to voluntarily depart the United States, the officials said. If the child agrees, agents will turn that child over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation. But if ICE doesn't pick them up from CBP custody within 72 hours, agents will refer them to HHS.
Two of the sources said the new policy is designed to apply to children ages 14 to 17.
'This is a long-standing practice that was used by previous administrations to prioritize getting children back to the safety of a parent or legal guardian in their home country. The policy of offering unaccompanied alien children (UACs) the option to withdraw their application for admission into the U.S. is accredited in the Trafficking Victims Prevention and Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022,' a Homeland Security spokesperson said in a statement.
'The only change pursuant to the Big Beautiful Bill is expanding this option to return home to UACs from additional countries beyond Mexico and Canada,' the spokesperson added.
The administration has been leaning on so-called self-deportations as they double down on President Donald Trump's sweeping mass deportation campaign. Some families, including those from mixed-status households, have opted to leave the country voluntarily, fearful of the administration's immigration crackdown.
Unaccompanied children residing in the US are usually afforded special protections given that they are deemed a vulnerable population. They are generally placed with family members already living in the US but are still deemed unaccompanied because they entered the country alone.
While existing policy generally allows for the swift removal of children arriving from Mexico and Canada because they're contiguous countries, that's not true for children of other nationalities. And the targeting of those kids from other countries — many of whom are living in the US with family — marks an escalation of the administration's deportation efforts.
'A child is in no position to understand the consequences of self-deporting, particularly without the guidance of an attorney,' said Neha Desai, managing director of Children's Human Rights at the National Center for Youth Law. 'Unaccompanied children are being used as pawns in an effort to deport as many people as possible, regardless of the human toll it takes on the most vulnerable members of our community.'
Trump and his top aides have repeatedly cited the influx of children who arrived at the US southern border alone under the Biden administration as a critique of his predecessor and his handling of border security. Trump officials argue that hundreds of thousands of those children went unaccounted for — and are in potentially dangerous situations. Former Biden officials and several experts refute those claims.
But that's served as the premise for multiple initiatives focused on unaccompanied migrant children who are either in government custody or living with family in the United States.
CNN previously reported that migrant children were coming back into government custody because of enforcement actions against their so-called sponsors, legal services typically offered to kids were being cut off, and children were being placed on expedited court dockets to speed up deportations.
The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, which has been in place for more than two decades, provides protections for unaccompanied migrant children who arrive and reside in the US, including being screened to see if they are victims of human trafficking or have a credible fear of persecution in their home country.
Children from Mexico and Canada have been asked to voluntarily depart as part of the removal process along the US southern border, but that hasn't been true for kids of other nationalities and it's unclear how the directive aligns with the protections outlined in law.
'They are not competent to make their own decisions,' a former Homeland Security official told CNN, referring to young migrant children. 'That's the whole idea — that they're a child. It's the whole premise of TVPRA.'
Other policy changes concerning unaccompanied children are also underway.
The Office of Refugee Resettlement, a federal agency that falls under HHS, has also implemented new guidelines that the agency describes as part of a broader effort to strengthen vetting of sponsors, who are usually family members of children. The guidelines require that staff meet with them in person before placing the kids, according to an email sent to staff and obtained by CNN.
But it also notes that federal law enforcement agencies 'may be present to meet their own mission objectives, which may include interviewing sponsors,' the email states. The potential involvement of federal enforcement agencies could exacerbate the already present chilling effect among immigrant families, many of whom are undocumented and who have children in custody, experts say.
'We are witnessing a fundamental unraveling of protections for this vulnerable population — a population that a bipartisan Congress sought to protect years ago through landmark federal legislation,' Desai said.
Hashtags

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


Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
MI Dems seek to prosecute mask-wearing ICE, after state instituted $500 fine for being maskless during COVID
A Michigan Democratic effort would open up ICE agents to state prosecution if they conduct immigration enforcement operations while wearing masks that conceal their identity. The effort comes five years after Michigan Democrats supported Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's order outlining $500 fines for civilians who, conversely, defied her executive order to wear masks in public during the coronavirus pandemic. The bill's sponsor, state Rep. Betsy Coffia, D-Traverse City, said Friday ICE's masking-up "mirror the tactics of secret police in authoritarian regimes and strays from the norms that define legitimate local law enforcement." "It confuses and frightens communities," she said. "Those who protect and serve our community should not do so behind a concealed identity." A banner on the dais from which Coffia announced the bill read, "Justice needs no masks." State Rep. Noah Arbit, D-West Bloomfield, added his name as a co-sponsor and said in a statement when a person is unable to discern whether someone apprehending them is a government authority or not, it "shreds the rule of law." "That is why the Trump administration and the Republican Party are the most pro-crime administration and political party that we have ever seen," Arbit said. Attorney General Dana Nessel, who was one of several state prosecutors to demand Congress pass similar legislation at the federal level, also threw her support behind the bill. "Imagine a set of circumstances where somebody might be a witness to a serious crime and that defendant has some friends go out and literally just mask up and go apprehend somebody at a courthouse," Nessel told the Traverse City NBC affiliate. However, during the coronavirus pandemic, Whitmer issued an executive order in June 2020 that mandated people "wear a face covering whenever they are in an indoor public space." "It also requires the use of face coverings in crowded outdoor spaces. Most significantly, the order requires any business that is open to the public to refuse entry or service to people who refuse to wear a face covering. No shirts, no shoes, no mask—no service," the order read. Violators who refused to wear masks in such situations, excluding houses of worship, were subject to $500 penalties, according to WXYZ. Nessel, at the time, had praised the Michigan Claims Court for acting quickly to clarify the legality of Whitmer's prior executive orders related to COVID-19, including the stay-at-home edict. "With this clarity, it's my hope that our public officials and residents can move forward with confidence that the Governor has acted in accordance with the authority provided to her under the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act," she said in a statement. "It's time for us all to focus on the health and safety of the people in this state rather than fighting against each other in unnecessary legal battles in our courts." Nessel also lent her name to an amicus brief this month supporting a case brought against ICE over tactics used during its raids in Los Angeles. "When masked, heavily armed federal agents operate with no identification, they threaten public safety and erode public trust," Nessel said in the brief. Michigan House Speaker Matt Hall, R-Kalamazoo, told Fox News Digital he doesn't see Coffia's bill making it to Whitmer's desk, calling it an "attack on law enforcement." "The people want these dangerous criminal aliens off our street, and we are doing everything we can to partner with the Trump administration and put an end to illegal immigration," he said Monday, adding that Democrats "will do everything they can to get in the way of local police and ICE because they've always cared more about criminals than victims. "But that ends here," he added. "This ridiculous bill is dead on arrival." When asked about the bill and the apparent COVID-related hypocrisy, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said it shows "power-hungry politicians" are continuing to "push disgusting smears against our brave officers, who are simply enforcing the law, in a repulsive effort to score cheap political points." "State Rep. Coffia has clearly never been on an ICE operation because she would see our officers verbally identify themselves, wear vests that say ICE/ERO or Homeland Security, and are flanked by vehicles that also say the name of the department." McLaughlin said the masks are vital to prevent officers from being targeted by "highly sophisticated gangs" like Tren de Aragua and MS-13. "These arguments are getting a little desperate," she said. Fox News Digital reached out to Nessel, Whitmer and Coffia for further comment.


CNN
4 hours ago
- CNN
Trump's trade war victory is already under siege
The economy was supposed to crumble. The trade war was expected to escalate out of control. Markets were forecast to plunge. None of that happened – at least, not yet. President Donald Trump has pulled off what few outside the White House predicted: A trade war victory of sorts that sets America's taxes on imported goods higher than the infamous Smoot-Hawley era, without any of the damaging fallout so far. Customs revenue has increased sharply while inflation remains reasonably low. And America's trading partners, for the most part, have been willing to accept the higher tariffs without significant retaliation. Multiple framework agreements between the United States and other trading partners have jacked up tariffs on foreign goods imported to America while setting levies on US exports at or near zero. Overseas trading partners have agreed to open previously closed markets to some US goods, pledged increased investments in the United States and dropped some of what the Trump administration has lambasted as non-trade barriers, like taxes on digital services. But Trump's early trade victory may be short-lived. In fact, it is already showing signs that it may not last. The European Union, fresh off its 11th-hour compromise to get a trade agreement done before Trump's self-imposed August 1 deadline, is already in revolt. French Prime Minister François Bayrou called Sunday a 'dark day.' Hungarian Prime Minister and Trump ally Viktor Orban said Trump steamrolled the EU. Belgium's Prime Minister Bart De Wever lambasted the Trump administration's 'delusion of protectionism.' And Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament's trade committee, said the deal is 'not satisfactory.' The 27-member bloc has to hammer out key aspects of its framework, and the fragile trade truce between two of the world's largest economies could quickly break apart if sentiment turns against the arrangement. The Trump administration's trade talks with its northern neighbor and one of its largest trading partners have been effectively shut down. Despite Canada relenting on its digital services tax that the president has lambasted, Trump continued to threaten higher tariffs on some Canadian goods, including lumber. Although many goods imported from Canada continue to be tariff-free because of the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement, the USMCA only covers just about half of Canadian goods. So higher tariffs on Canada could raise some costs for American consumers down the road. And the fact that America is even embroiled in a trade spat with Canada in the first place is a sign that the recent cooling off in the trade war may not last: Trump negotiated and signed the United States' current trade agreement with Canada during his first term. At any time, even after an agreement is inked, Trump could turn around and decide to raise tariffs again. A third round of talks between China and the United States' trade negotiators is expected to result in a continued pause of their historically high tariffs on one another. But it's unclear what else might come from the discussions, and the Trump administration has grown frustrated by what it has described as China's slow-walking of its previous agreements. Both sides have aimed to reduce more regulatory barriers on shipments of key technologies. China has sought more access to critical semiconductors, and the United States wants the flow of rare earth magnets to increase further. But the Trump administration has tried repeatedly to speed up China's slow progress, claiming the country has failed to live up to its agreement to approve the critical materials for crucial electronics. Trump has also said he wants China to open up its market to more US goods – a desire that Chinese Premier Xi Jinping is unlikely to give in to significantly. Trump's rhetoric against China has cooled in recent months, but the truce appears to be on a knife's edge. A crucial appeals court hearing Thursday could determine whether most of Trump's tariffs are legal at all. For most of his tariffs, Trump has cited powers listed in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. But a federal court in May ruled that Trump overstepped his authority to levy tariffs on that basis. An appeals court paused that ruling from taking effect and will hear oral arguments Thursday. It's not clear when the court will rule, and the White House would likely appeal to the Supreme Court if it loses. If Trump ultimately loses his ability to levy tariffs using emergency powers, he has plenty of other options – but legal experts have said those alternatives could limit his ability to set tariffs without Congress. For example, Trump may be able to impose some tariffs as high as just 15% but only for 150 days, potentially taking some of the bite out of his tariff regime. Although the US economy remains strong, with rebounding retail sales, a still-robust labor market and rising consumer confidence, there is some evidence that inflation in key areas is starting to creep higher – slowly – because of tariffs. That's a potential warning sign as the tariffs take full effect. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index earlier this month showed that some tariff-affected goods have started to gain in price. Clothing, appliances, computers, sporting goods, toys, video equipment, hardware and tools prices have been on the rise. And it's starting to become a trend – in many of those categories, the rise has been happening for a few months. Many major retailers, including Walmart, have said they will raise prices because of tariffs. And GM, Volkswagen and Stellantis all reported tariff charges of $1 billion or more over the past quarter. Economists widely expect inflation to pick up in the late summer and throughout the rest of the year as retailers work through the inventories of goods they had stockpiled before tariffs went into effect. No one expects anything close to the inflation crisis of a few years ago. But with consumers still dealing with price-hike PTSD, that won't be a welcome change from the return to healthy inflation levels over the past year.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Looking ahead to the race for Rhode Island attorney general
The campaign to replace term-limited Attorney General Peter Neronha will be one of the most-watched races in the state next year. Solve the daily Crossword