General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsACLU to continue lawsuit over Trump policies toward immigrant families
This lawsuit has already survived a trump DOJ motion to dismiss and will be going to trial https://www.politicususa.com/2018/06/20/aclu-to-continue-lawsuit-over-trump-policies-toward-immigrant-families.html
The nonprofit plans to seek an order in the federal court in San Diego compelling the reunification of immigrant parents with their children, a lawyer for the ACLU said in a phone interview.
The announcement came after Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order ending the separation of families and instead calling for the detention of parents and children together.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)all will be broke within several years.
Gothmog
(145,554 posts)MichMan
(11,971 posts)Would a successful lawsuit require they be deported to reunite with their parents?
And how would such a ruling impact DACA kids who might have had their parents deported years ago?
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)blake2012
(1,294 posts)If the US government didnt separate children upon arrival, the case would not be within scope of this argument being made.
MichMan
(11,971 posts)blake2012
(1,294 posts)The case is about families who were separated by Trumps departments on the border.
MichMan
(11,971 posts)Unaccompanied minors have a much more difficult path to be reunited.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)liars. I know the EO does not stop the child kidnappings.
blake2012
(1,294 posts)bdamomma
(63,922 posts)I increased my monthly donation to them yesterday.
Gothmog
(145,554 posts)Here is some from the first ruling that came down on June 6 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/district-court-judge-rules-that-trump-administration-child-separations-would-be-unconstitutional.html
For Plaintiffs, the government actors responsible for the care and custody of migrant children have, in fact, become their persecutors. These allegations sufficiently describe government conduct that arbitrarily tears at the sacred bond between parent and child, and is emblematic of the exercise of power without any reasonable justification in the service of an otherwise legitimate governmental objective[.] Such conduct, if true, as it is assumed to be on the present motion, is brutal, offensive, and fails to comport with traditional notions of fair play and decency. At a minimum, the facts alleged are sufficient to show the government conduct at issue shocks the conscience and violates Plaintiffs constitutional right to family integrity. Accordingly, Defendants motion to dismiss Plaintiffs due process claim is denied.
As Sabraw noted, he is still poised to rule on whether or not separated families will be certified as part of the ACLUs requested class action lawsuit, and to determine if a preliminary injunction will be issued to halt a practice he describes as brutal, offensive, and [failing] to comport with traditional notions of fair play and decency. In other words, the class action question is still open, but his view that such a practice is shockingly cruel for constitutional purposes, does not seem to be in doubt.
The ACLU attorney who argued the case, Lee Gelernt, described the ruling to me as a powerful initial victory for his clients.
This is an enormous ruling, theres no question about it, because the major dispute between us and the government was whether there was a constitutional right [for] families to remain together in these circumstances, Gelernt told me.
The court has essentially said that the practice alleged in the suitand reportedly taking place all across our border for the past monthis a gross violation of the U.S. constitution. Now it has merely to determine whether the practice is actually taking place.
Gothmog
(145,554 posts)Gothmog
(145,554 posts)I have been following this case for a while. I hope that the ACLU is successful https://www.politicususa.com/2018/06/25/aclu-urges-injunction-against-separating-immigrant-families.html
In a filing with the U.S. District Court in San Diego, the ACLU said an injunction was needed because President Donald Trumps June 20 executive order to end separations contained loopholes, even when childrens welfare might be endangered.
An injunction would also require families to be reunified within 30 days, unless the parents were unfit or were housed in adult-only criminal facilities. The government could appeal.
A spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Adam Braverman, whose office represents the government, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The filing came after U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw on June 6 said forced separations could be unconstitutional, and rejected the governments bid to dismiss the ACLUs lawsuit.