Friday, September 7, 2018

Latest Overnight Status Report On Families Seeking Reunification: Hearing In Ms. L Case In San Diego Up Later Today.


The full 20 page report is a PDF linked here, as filed overnight.

But I will highlight the below, to suggest these are ongoing crimes against humanity by Donald Trump, personally. He has ordered every bit of this unspeakable cruelty.

Here we see the government's lack of genuine concern for children -- with shifting explanations for why a three and two year old, respectively -- are being denied reunification with their parent. This is appalling (at page 16, et seq.). A judge specifically previously ruled against the government's assessment, yet it persists in keeping a mother away from her child (while the child has aged -- from three to four). This is (in my experienced opinion) the stuff of prompt and jail-laden orders for contempt of court (against the government actors), were it a domestic state level family court case:

. . . .Plaintiffs’ understanding that the parties have already reached impasse on two cases involving parents, on which Plaintiffs may seek expedited resolution. Plaintiffs are particularly concerned about one family’s case involving a four-year-old child (who was three when he was first detained). The child’s mother was denied reunification based on an outstanding warrant from abroad, which alleges that she is a gang member. The mother denies this allegation, and at her immigration bond hearing, the immigration judge expressly found that this warrant was not sufficient evidence that the mother was a danger to the community. Defendants have nevertheless refused to reunify this family based on the parent’s alleged criminal history. This child is suffering greatly in detention and is at particular risk of grievous and irreparable harm. . . .

The second case involves a father who was denied reunification with his two-year-old son. The father was initially denied reunification based on questions concerning parentage, but Defendants’ more recent position is that the father is ineligible for reunification because of his criminal history. The only criminal history of which Plaintiffs are aware is the father’s guilty plea for assault from 2010, which has no bearing on his current dangerousness or ability to care for his child.

Because of the youth of the children involved, and the fact that the parties are already at impasse on them, Plaintiffs request that this Court set an expedited briefing schedule to resolve whether they are entitled to reunification under the standards set forth in this Court’s orders. . . .


In a normal family court case in Cook County, Illinois. . . the government lawyers might be risking jail for contempt, had they taken these disingenuous positions as to toddlers -- the harm is almost always incalculable, and irreparable here. I'm thus in a decidedly dark mood, on this dull gray Friday morning. You've been warned.

नमस्ते

No comments: