Children Separated Because ICE Deported Their Parents

ICE ‘Deletes’ Families It Can’t Reunite

‘Deleted’ families: What went wrong with Trump’s family-separation effort. WaPo: “When a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to reunify migrant families separated at the border, the government’s cleanup crews faced an immediate problem. They weren’t sure who the families were, let alone what to call them. Customs and Border Protection databases had categories for ‘family units,’ and ‘unaccompanied alien children’ who arrive without parents. They did not have a distinct classification for more than 2,600 children who had been taken from their families and placed in government shelters. So agents came up with a new term: ‘deleted family units.’… Compounding failures to record, classify and keep track of migrant parents and children pulled apart by President Trump’s ‘zero tolerance’ border crackdown were at the core of what is now widely regarded as one of the biggest debacles of his presidency. The rapid implementation and sudden reversal of the policy whiplashed multiple federal agencies, forcing the activation of an HHS command center ordinarily used to handle hurricanes and other catastrophes.”

SABRAW FOCUSES ON DEPORTED PARENTS: U.S. District Court Judge Dana Sabraw on Friday called for both parties in a class-action lawsuit over family separations to focus on the task of reuniting parents who were deported to their home countries or released into the United States.

"That's the most pressing group," Sabraw said, according to a transcript of proceedings. "And all efforts have to be made to identify and locate those parents and then to reunify as quickly as possible." The Justice Department said Friday that it had provided a list of 468 migrant parents outside the country to the ACLU, which represents the plaintiffs. A separate group of 35 parents released into the U.S. haven't been located, a DOJ attorney said Friday. Sabraw said that going forward both parties must "devote enormous resources" to the undertaking.

Sabraw praised the Trump administration's efforts to reunify families it deemed "eligible" before a July 26 deadline for children ages 5 to 17. The administration reunited at least 1,442 children with parents who were in custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, according to a court filing last week, while another 378 were connected with parents or sponsors in the U.S. or turned 18 while in custody. The majority of reunited families were released into the U.S., DOJ attorney Scott Stewart said in court.

But 650 children remain separated from their parents, Stewart said. The legal proceedings will now turn to these cases, which include children whose parents were deported and families that the administration deemed ineligible for reunification. Any contested cases will be addressed "on a rolling basis," Sabraw said. The judge said he will require weekly status reports every Thursday and telephonic conferences every Friday until the missing parents are located and other issues are resolved.

Hundreds of Children Remain Separated From Their Families

Getty Images

As Reunification Deadline Looms:

Hundreds of Families Remain Separated

Shortly before today's court-ordered deadline for the reunification of families separated at the border, only 1,442 children had been reunited with their parents--one in three children remains separated. Some 468 parents have already been deported and there are considerable fears they may not be reunited without their children.

During recent days, children and parents who had been transferred away from the border area have been moved back to the region in anticipation of reunification. The ACLU had filed a suit requesting that any deportations be delayed for a week so that parents who have been reunified with children can make decisions important decisions--including the possibility of having children remain in the U.S. with close family members so that the children, who have separate cases from the parents, could be considered for asylum.

120 parents reportedly "waived" their rights for reunification--this could mean they are allowing their children to file a separate case to see if they could remain in the U.S--or in some cases, the parents may have been confused about what they were signing.

In the meantime, reports continue to emerge:

378 children have been released to close family members or reunited wih families in other ways, or they could have turned 18 and "aged out".

The parents of over 700 children have been deemed "ineligible" to be reunited with their children due to "criminal" charges--which apparently include hundreds of parents charged with the "crime" of unlawful entry or re-entry. This number includes the parents who have already been deported, have other charges against them, or who had been released and can't be located. We have no information on all of the charges, nor is there information about what will happen to the children of these "ineligible" parents.

Some parents who have been deported have told lawyers that they felt coerced to sign documents for "voluntary" departure, and did not understand that their children would not go with them. Many parents simply did not understand the "options" presented to them by officials.

Both parents and children, even after reunification, are experiencing emotional distress, with many children apparently still fearful, feeling that their parents had abandoned them, and suffering the effects of separation and their treatment in detention. Some 200 accounts collected by about 100 lawyers and coordinated by the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law found horrible conditions for children in the Border Patrol stations, where they are held before being sent to detention centers, as well as stories of abuse and inhumane treatment in the centers themselves.

Some members of Congress who traveled to the border last weekend, were also critical of what they witnessed, as in this video.

$41 Billion Spent on California Schools - Where is the Money Going?

BY ELISE BUIK, ANTONIA HERNÁNDEZ AND BRUCE FULLER

Special to The Bee

Gov. Jerry Brown promised four years ago to lift all schools and narrow yawning gaps in learning among California’s rainbow of students, a stubborn inequity that limits our workforce and fractures civil society.

But in her children’s schools, Guadalupe Luna sees little trace of Brown’s ambitious reform.

“I’m frustrated and angry to know that the money is not getting to high-needs students” as Brown pledged, Luna said.

She’s taking legal action with fellow parents to block the Long Beach school board from diverting $40 million away from struggling students. Little money can be found, the plaintiffs argue, for “school uniforms and better training for teachers,” or tutoring for kids already falling behind.

WITH MONEY FOR LOW ACHIEVERS GOING TO JANITORS, TEACHER SALARIES AND MIDDLE-CLASS SCHOOLS, A BILL MOVING THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE WOULD SHINE A BRIGHTER LIGHT ON SCHOOL-BY-SCHOOL SPENDING. YET THE GOVERNOR’S TOP ADVISERS WON’T SUPPORT IT. WHY NOT?

Bewildering really, after Brown has rained $41 billion on local school chiefs over the past four years, beseeching them to elevate lagging pupils.

How Some California Charter Schools Illegally Restrict Enrollment

Report: Unequal Access

Download the full report (.pdf).

How Some California Charter Schools Illegally Restrict Enrollment

All across California, charter schools are implementing admissions policies that exclude students from enrolling. Like other public schools, charters must admit all students who wish to attend. By law, they may not discourage certain students from enrolling based on income, national origin, academic performance or other factors. These admission policies threaten to turn public schooling into a two-tier system where the students who need the most resources receive the fewest.

To realize charter schools’ promise of providing educational choice to all, the ACLU SoCal and Public Advocates released “Unequal Access: How Some California Charter Schools Illegal Restrict Enrollment,” a report that sheds light on exclusionary enrollment policies at 253 charter schools. See full list of charter schools cited.

These charter schools post enrollment policies or forms online that are clearly illegal or exclusionary. Other schools may also maintain similar prohibited policies that are hidden from the public view. The violations we found include:

• Exclusion Based on Academic Performance
• Discrimination against English Learners
• Pre-Enrollment Essays or Interviews
• Requirements that Discourage Undocumented Students
• Illegal Parent/Guardian Volunteer Requirements