logo
Family files for release in lawsuit considered first involving children challenging arrests at court

Family files for release in lawsuit considered first involving children challenging arrests at court

A mother and her two young kids are fighting for their release from a Texas immigration detention center in what is believed to be the first lawsuit involving children challenging the Trump administration's policy on immigrant arrests at courthouses.
The lawsuit filed Tuesday argues that the family's arrests after fleeing Honduras and entering the U.S. legally using a Biden-era appointment app violate the family's Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure and their Fifth Amendment right to due process.
'The big picture is that the executive branch cannot seize people, arrest people, detain people indefinitely when they are complying with exactly what our government has required of them,' said Columbia Law School professor Elora Mukherjee, one of the lawyers representing the family.
The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment.
Starting in May, the country has seen large-scale arrests in which asylum-seekers appearing at routine court hearings have been arrested outside courtrooms as part of the White House's mass deportation effort. In many cases, a judge will grant a government lawyer's request to dismiss deportation proceedings and then U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers will arrest the person and place them on 'expedited removal,' a fast track to deportation.
Mukherjee said this is the first lawsuit filed on behalf of children to challenge the ICE courthouse arrest policy.
There have been other similar lawsuits, such as in New York, where a federal judge ruled earlier this month that federal immigration authorities can't make civil arrests at the state's courthouses or arrest anyone going there for a proceeding.
The Texas lawsuit was filed using initials for the children and 'Ms. Z' for the mother. Their identities have not been released because of concerns for the family's safety.
As the family has been held for a month in the Dilley Immigration Processing Center, the mother has watched her 6-year-old son's health decline, Mukherjee said. He recently underwent chemotherapy treatment for leukemia and because of his arrest missed his check-in doctor's appointment, Mukherjee said. In the weeks since, he has lost his appetite.
'He's easily bruising. He has bone pain. He looks pale,' Mukherjee said. 'His mom is terrified that these are symptoms that his leukemia situation might be deteriorating.'
The mother, son and 9-year-old daughter fled Honduras in October 2024 due to death threats, according to the lawsuit. They entered the U.S. using the CBP One app and were paroled into the country by the Department of Homeland Security, which determined they didn't pose a danger to the community, Mukherjee said. They were told to appear at a Los Angeles immigration court May 29.
President Donald Trump ended CBP One for new entrants on his first day in office after more than 900,000 people had been allowed in the country using the app since it was expanded to include migrants in January 2023.
During the family's hearing, the mother tried to explain to the judge that they wished to continue their cases for asylum, Mukherjee said. Homeland Security moved to dismiss their cases, and the judge immediately granted that motion.
When they stepped out of the courtroom, they found men in civilian clothing believed to be ICE agents who arrested the family, Mukherjee said. They were transported to an immigrant processing center in Los Angeles, where they spent about 11 hours and were each only given an apple, a small packet of cookies, a juice box and water.
At one point, an officer near the boy lifted his shirt, revealing his gun. The boy urinated on himself and was left in wet clothing until the next morning, Mukherjee said.
They were later taken to the processing center, where they have been held ever since.
'The family is suffering in this immigration detention center,' she said. 'The kids are crying every night. They're praying to God for their release from this detention center.'
Their lawyers have filed an appeal of the immigration judge's May decision, but they're at risk of being deported within days because the government says they are subjected to expedited removal, Mukherjee said.
The arrests of the family were illegal and unjustified, said Kate Gibson Kumar, an attorney for the Texas Civil Rights project who is also representing the family.
She said the government had already decided when they first entered the country that the family didn't need to be detained.
'The essential question in our case is, when you have these families who are doing everything right, especially with young children, should there be some protection there?' Gibson Kumar said. 'We say 'yes.''
___
Associated Press reporter Nadia Lathan in Austin, Texas, contributed to this report.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

America First — it all depends on the day
America First — it all depends on the day

Winnipeg Free Press

timean hour ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

America First — it all depends on the day

Opinion When faced with making a major decision or delivering important legislation, U.S. President Donald Trump has a well-documented penchant for promising all will be accomplished in a proverbial 'two weeks.' And nearly every time he has made this declaration — about, for example, new tax legislation and a revamped health-care plan during his first term and more recently, ending the Russia-Ukraine war — 14 days later, no decisions have been made and no legislation has been forthcoming. Hence, his pronouncement on June 19 that he would decide whether to approve bombing Iran's key nuclear sites within two weeks was met with the usual eye-rolling and sarcastic tittering. Talk-show host Jimmy Kimmel ran a hilarious compilation of many of Trump's two-week declarations. 'He lies a lot,' said Kimmel. 'So who the hell knows what he's going to do.' Lo and behold, on June 21, Trump made a decision and U.S. B-2 bombers dropped massive bombs at three nuclear facilities. Trump immediately claimed the bombing 'completely and fully obliterated' Iran's nuclear program. That now seems unlikely, according to a classified U.S. intelligence report leaked to the press. Iran's program, the report noted, has been set back by months, but more than likely has not been eliminated. Predictably, the White House declared that assessment 'flat-out wrong.' Trump has never been consistent. No matter: the fact this military action does not fit into the isolationist 'America First' platform he campaigned on has already been rationalized away by diehard MAGA Republicans. The majority of them have perceived it as a one-time offensive intrusion into world affairs, an action outside the self-contained U.S. bubble. And that seems to be the case. Iran retaliated on June 23, by launching missiles at an American military base in Qatar, but air defense systems intercepted them before they did any damage. According to news reports, Iran informed officials in Qatar of the impending attack, which suggests Iran does not want to get into an all-out war with the U.S. And Trump said he won't retaliate. Early on June 24, Trump declared Iran and Israel had agreed to a cease-fire, yet both countries continued to attack each other, raising Trump's ire. By the end of the day, the fighting seemed to have stopped and the 'fragile cease-fire,' as the New York Times called it, appears to be holding — at least for the moment. As pragmatic — and, dare I say, strategically necessary — as was Trump's decision to try to stop the ruthless Iranian regime from becoming a nuclear power and to force cease-fire, it does not discount how, in less than six months, Trump has upended the military and economic alliances and policies that have effectively governed world affairs since the end of the Second World War. Yes, the so-called 'Cold War' between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union was a dangerous era of nuclear brinksmanship that nearly started a third world war. But that war did not happen; instead, the U.S. initiated the Marshall Plan to rebuild of war-torn western Europe, which led to decades of economic prosperity. Advances in technology had a generally positive impact on people's lives, and the defeat of Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and the militaristic Empire of Japan was a boon for the spread of democracy. Franklin D. Roosevelt, the U.S. president during the 1930s and the Second World War, was keen to aid Britain before and after the war started in September 1939, but he was hamstrung by the same kind of isolationist 'America First' policy that Trump so proudly touts. Until, that is, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in December 1941. There were periods in the 1890s, and during the last 18 months of the First World War, when the U.S. was active in world affairs. But for the most part, from the American Revolution to December 1941, the country's leaders were determined to stay out of European entanglements. That dictum was established by president George Washington, who said in his 1796 farewell address, 'The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, (and) to have with them as little political connection as possible.' More than a century later, during the November 1916 presidential campaign, incumbent Democrat candidate Woodrow Wilson used the slogan 'America First,' promising to keep the U.S. out of the First World War. That did not happen, as Germany's foolish decision to offer — in the Zimmermann telegram — to assist Mexico to reclaim territory lost to the Americans compelled Wilson to obtain Congress's support to enter the war, as is required by the U.S. constitution. Trump did not seek congressional approval for the military action against Iran, though such approval is (probably) required by the War Powers Resolution of 1973. After the First World War ended, the 'America First' policy kicked in again. The Republican-controlled senate ensured the U.S. was not part of the League of Nations, the predecessor of the United Nations, established to promote world peace. Without American support, the League faltered badly, allowing Mussolini, Hitler and Japan's leaders to do pretty well as they wanted until Britain finally took action against Hitler in September 1939. A lot of Americans, including famed aviator Charles Lindbergh, a supporter of the 'America First Committee,' had no problem with that. In a controversial speech in Des Moines, Iowa in September 1941, Lindbergh blamed FDR and his administration and the 'British and Jewish races' for deceiving the American public with war propaganda. Despite the praise Trump has received from several world leaders, most Republicans and even some Democrats for ordering the strike on Iran and negotiating a cease-fire, he remains the erratic and unpredictable would-be authoritarian he always has been. Now & Then is a column in which historian Allan Levine puts the events of today in a historical context.

Trump says US has signed a deal with China on trade, without giving details
Trump says US has signed a deal with China on trade, without giving details

Winnipeg Free Press

time2 hours ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

Trump says US has signed a deal with China on trade, without giving details

BANGKOK (AP) — The U.S. and China have signed an agreement on trade, President Donald Trump said, adding he expects to soon have a deal with India. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Bloomberg TV that the deal was signed earlier this week. Neither Lutnick nor Trump provided any details about the agreement. 'We just signed with China the other day,' Trump said late Thursday. Lutnick said the deal was 'signed and sealed' two days earlier. It follows initial talks in Geneva in early May that led both sides to postpone massive tariff hikes that were threatening to freeze much trade between the two countries. Later talks in London set a framework for negotiations and the deal mentioned by Trump appeared to formalize that agreement. 'The president likes to close these deals himself. He's the dealmaker. We're going to have deal after deal,' Lutnick said. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. China has not announced any new agreements, but it announced earlier this week that it was speeding up approvals of exports of rare earths, materials used in high-tech products such as electric vehicles. Beijing's limits on exports of rare earths have been a key point of contention. The Chinese Commerce Ministry said Thursday that Beijing was accelerating review of export license applications for rare earths and had approved 'a certain number of compliant applications.'

Family sues over US detention in what may be first challenge to courthouse arrests involving kids
Family sues over US detention in what may be first challenge to courthouse arrests involving kids

Toronto Star

time3 hours ago

  • Toronto Star

Family sues over US detention in what may be first challenge to courthouse arrests involving kids

A mother and her two young kids are fighting for their release from a Texas immigration detention center in what is believed to be the first lawsuit involving children challenging the Trump administration's policy on immigrant arrests at courthouses. The lawsuit filed Tuesday argues that the family's arrests after fleeing Honduras and entering the U.S. legally using a Biden-era appointment app violate their Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure and their Fifth Amendment right to due process.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store