It seems the Trump Crisis Actors now argue that the revised version of the prohibited form gives them that same right. That is simply a lie. And the judges in San Diego, Los Angeles and DC will soon say so -- but in the mean-time, the Trump ICE agents are trying to con migrants into agreeing to deportation. Here is the overnight ACLU letter briefing in full (and the PDf of it):
. . . .It appears that the Government intends to argue, in this Court and before Judge Friedman, that the election forms signed by Ms. L. parents not only preclude a stay, but also, remarkably, waive substantive asylum rights for both the parents and children. See Gov’t TRO Opp., M.M.M. v. Sessions, Dkt. 15, at 5. Plaintiffs believe that is an incorrect reading of the scope of the election form approved by this Court and would raise profound questions under domestic and international asylum laws. Most particularly, it would allow the Government to accomplish precisely what this Court said it would not allow: conditioning reunification on giving up asylum rights. We therefore write to ensure that anything this Court might say in its stay ruling about the election forms does not unnecessarily prejudge or preclude the type of relief sought before Judge Friedman by the Ms. L. children. Plaintiffs also believe that there is currently no reason why transfer to this Court is necessary.
As the Court is aware, the form was created in a very specific context. The government was using a different form that suggested to parents that they needed to waive their right to contest removal in order to obtain reunification. The current form approved by the Court was adopted to dispel that impression, and nothing more. Indeed, if parents were forced to sign the forms before reunification and could be removed immediately upon reunification, it would mean that the parents, in order to be reunified, would have to give up challenges to their removal orders and waive their children’s asylum rights as well.
But until pro bono counsel can consult with the families as a group, there will be no way of knowing what options the family retains. See Manning Declaration, Ex. 59, ¶ 5-7 (filed July 28) (noting how asylum process works in the absence of family separation). In short, the Government upended the normal asylum process by separating families. It must now give the families it harmed the opportunity to seek the relief they would have been entitled to seek had they never been separated.
And it should not be able to deny Class Members the consultation necessary to understand these options, especially given how individualized asylum cases are. Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court not offer a view on the scope of the election form in ruling on the stay. Addressing that issue is not necessary to resolve the stay motion; indeed, Plaintiffs’ current stay motion does not ask this Court to determine what procedural or substantive rights either parents or especially children are entitled to.
Alternatively, the Court can defer ruling on the stay motion at this point given the Government’s agreement not to remove children or their parents until Judge Friedman hears argument on the stay request in M.M.M. At a minimum, Plaintiffs respectfully request the opportunity to file a brief further explaining their view of the election form. Plaintiffs would also request that the Court permit amicus briefs by national asylum groups and leading academics to explain the danger of reading the form as precluding any opportunity for the child to apply for asylum or for the parent to exercise his or her right to a joint CFI hearing or some other remedy that would have been available had the families not been separated. . . .
As I close this morning's installment, I will note that Cheat-o-lini last night tweeted out (as excrement!) the one sentence praising the HHS/ICE reunification work, from Judge Gee, and omitted the 32 additional pages of criticism -- of the unlawfulness he personally has enmbarked upon. Trump then claimed he has done "more than any prior president" -- to reunify migrant families. Good lord.
That is only true insofar as no other president committed his ongoing crimes against (well-settled) US law (Flores, et al. v. Meese, et al.), and against basic humanity -- in kidnapping babies (as he is wont -- now, over 2,600 children).
Onward -- despite this lying, inhumane. . . pile of dung.
नमस्ते
1 comment:
Judge Sabraw is incredulous that Trump wants to shift responsibility for cleaning up this shocking crime against humanity — to the ACLU (!), and he said so just now:
..."The reality is that for every parent who is not located, there will be a permanently orphaned child, and that is 100 percent the responsibility of the administration," Sabraw said. "The government has the sole burden and responsibility and obligation to make (reunifications) happen."
The judge also scolded administration officials for moving so slowly to track down the deported parents. He cited an estimate that only about a dozen of the parents have been found in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, asking, "Is that true?"....
"What is absolutely essential ... is that the government identify a single person of the same talent and energy and enthusiasm and can-do spirit as Commander White to head up the reunification process of the remaining parents," Sabraw said. "There has to be someone to hold to account and to supervise the entire process...."
Post a Comment