Trump administration seeks to expand immigrant family detention

Dozens of women and their children, many fleeing poverty and violence in Honduras, Guatamala and El Salvador, arrive at a bus station following release from Customs and Border Protection on June 22, 2018 in McAllen, Texas. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images/AFP)
Updated 23 June 2018
Follow

Trump administration seeks to expand immigrant family detention

  • The proposed expansion comes days after a public outcry moved the administration to cease the practice of separating children from their migrant parents on the border
  • More than 2,300 children have been taken from their parents since Homeland Security announced a plan in April to prosecute all immigrants caught on the border

SANTA ANA, Calif: The Trump administration is calling for the expanded use of family detention for immigrant parents and children who are stopped along the US-Mexico border, a move decried by advocates as a cruel and ineffective attempt to deter families from coming to the United States.
Immigration authorities on Friday issued a notice that they may seek up to 15,000 beds to detain families. The Justice Department has also asked a federal court in California to allow children to be detained longer and in facilities that don’t require state licensing while they await immigration court proceedings.
“The current situation is untenable,” August Flentje, special counsel to the assistant attorney general, wrote in court filings seeking to change a longstanding court settlement that governs the detention of immigrant children. The more constrained the Homeland Security Department is in detaining families together during immigration proceedings, “the more likely it is that families will attempt illegal border crossing.”
The proposed expansion comes days after a public outcry moved the administration to cease the practice of separating children from their migrant parents on the border. More than 2,300 children have been taken from their parents since Homeland Security announced a plan in April to prosecute all immigrants caught on the border.
In all, about 9,000 immigrants traveling in family groups have been caught on the border in each of the last three months, according to federal authorities.
Immigrant advocates contend detention is no place for children and insist there are other alternatives to ensure they and their parents attend immigration court hearings, such as ankle bracelets or community-based programs. The federal court ruled several years ago that children must be released as quickly as possible from family detention.
“It is definitely not a solution under any circumstances,” said Manoj Govindaiah, director of family detention services at the RAICES advocacy group in Texas. “At no point should a child be incarcerated, and children need to be with their parents.”
Immigration and Customs Enforcement currently has three family detention facilities — a 100-bed center opened in Pennsylvania in 2001 and two much larger facilities opened in Texas in 2014. Only the Pennsylvania facility can house men, and all of the detainees at the Texas centers are women with children.
In Dilley, Texas, a facility was built on a remote site that was once an old oil workers’ encampment. It includes collections of cottages built around playgrounds. The other Texas center, in Karnes City, is ringed by 15-foot fences and has security cameras monitoring movements. It also offers bilingual children’s books in the library, classes, TVs and an artificial turf soccer field.
Inside the Karnes City center, there are five or six beds to a room typically shared by a couple of families. Cinderblock walls are painted pastel colors, said Govindaiah, who added that the facilities are run by private prison operators, not humanitarian organizations, as is the case with shelters for unaccompanied immigrant children.
Currently, most families spend up to a few weeks in the facilities and are released once they pass an initial asylum screening. They are then given a date to appear before an immigration judge in the cities where they are headed to see if they qualify to stay in the country legally or will face deportation.
Those who do not pass initial screenings can seek additional review in a video conference with a judge, a process that lasts about six weeks.
But that’s much shorter than the six months or a year many families were being held several years ago when the Obama administration began detaining mothers and children in a bid to stem a surge in arrivals on the border, Govindaiah said.
At the time, many were being held until their immigration cases — not just the initial screenings — were resolved.
Advocates then asked the federal court to enforce a decades-old settlement over the detention of immigrant children, and a judge ruled the children should be released as quickly as possible.
The settlement is seen by advocates as a way to ensure children are placed in age-appropriate facilities and for no longer than necessary. State licensing adds another layer of oversight.
“You will have children in facilities that are entirely inappropriate for children and are not meeting child welfare standards,” said Michelle Brane, director of the migrant rights and justice program at the Women’s Refugee Commission. “They are trying to circumvent child welfare standards.”
Brane said there is a viable alternative: supervised release to communities around the country. The federal Family Case Management Program — terminated under the Trump administration — compiled a perfect record of attendance by migrants at court hearings, and a 99 percent appearance record at immigration check-ins, according to a 2017 report by the Homeland Security inspector general.
Just 2 percent of participants — 23 out of 954 — were reported as absconders.
In Friday’s notice, ICE said the family detention beds should be in state-licensed facilities and allow freedom of movement for detainees, and should preferably be located in states along the southwest border.
In addition to providing private showers and educational field trips for children, the centers should appear “child-friendly rather than penal in nature,” the agency said.


UK veterans are ‘ticking time bomb’ after Iraq war chemical exposure

Updated 59 min 52 sec ago
Follow

UK veterans are ‘ticking time bomb’ after Iraq war chemical exposure

  • Fifteen former RAF personnel were deployed to the Qarmat Ali water plant in 2003, which was contaminated with sodium dichromate
  • Veterans say they were not screened or protected, and are now living with serious health conditions

LONDON: Fifteen British servicemen who worked on a carcinogen-contaminated water treatment site during the Iraq war say they were not offered biological screening despite official guidance saying they should have been.

The former Royal Air Force members, who have suffered from ailments including cancer, tumors and nosebleeds, told Sky News they were offered no medical assistance or subsequent treatment after having been exposed to toxic sodium dichromate at the Qarmat Ali water treatment plant in 2003.

The channel said it had seen a letter from the RAF’s medical authority stating that senior officers knew of the dangers posed by the substance.

Peter Lewis, 53, was one of 88 personnel deployed to guard the site, which was deemed vital for getting Iraq’s oil industry up and running. He told Sky: “I’ve had eight or nine operations to remove cancer.

“I’ve had so many lumps taken out of my neck, one on my face. This is something I’m literally fighting every year now. It’s constant.”

Qarmat Ali, the former troops say, was covered in ripped bags of bright orange sodium dichromate.

“We were never warned what the bags of chemicals were,” Jon Caunt, another former serviceman, said. “We were breathing this stuff in.”

His former comrade Tony Watters added: “I never thought about what it was. We were told the site is safe.”

Several months after deployment to the site, however, the servicemen were joined by two workers wearing protective gear who placed signs around it reading: “Warning. Chemical hazard. Full protective equipment and chemical respirator required. Sodium dichromate exposure.”

Watters said: “When you left the site, your uniform was contaminated, your webbing was contaminated.

“You went in your sleeping bag, and that was contaminated. And you were contaminating other people with it back at camp.”

Andy Tosh, who has led the group of veterans as they sought answers from the Ministry of Defence, said: “Even with the warning signs going up … they kept us there. They knowingly kept us exposed.”

The RAF gave some of the men a leaflet on their return to the UK, warning of the dangers of the substance, but not all were told.

The letter seen by Sky acknowledging the dangers posed to the veterans made a “strong” link to “increased risk of lung and nose cancer” as well as numerous other issues. It suggested personnel sent to Qarmat Ali should have their medical records altered to mention their exposure to sodium dichromate.

“Offer biological screening. This cannot be detailed until the numbers exposed are confirmed,” the letter also said.

An inquiry into US personnel deployed to Qarmat Ali found that 830 people were “unintentionally exposed” to sodium dichromate, giving them access to support from the US Department of Veterans Affairs. This came after the death of Lt. Col. James Gentry from cancer in 2009, which the US Army determined came “in line of duty for exposure to sodium dichromate.”

There has been no such inquiry by UK authorities despite British personnel being deployed at the site for longer than their American counterparts.

Thirteen of them have suffered from cancer and similar symptoms, including one who developed a brain tumor.

Jim Garth told Sky: “My skin cancer will never go away … It’s treatable, but when the treatment is finished, it comes back, so I’ve got that for life really.”

Lewis added: “I’m actually getting to the point now where I don’t care anymore … sooner or later, it’s going to do me.”

Caunt described his former colleagues’ conditions as a “ticking time bomb.”

He added: “We do not know what’s going to happen in the future."

The MoD insists medical screening was offered to personnel at the time, despite the men stating that it was not. In 2024, several met with Labour MPs about the issue. One, John Healey, who is now the UK defence secretary, said at the time the veterans should have “answers to their important questions.”

In a statement, the MoD said: “We take very seriously the concerns raised by veterans who were deployed to guard the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in 2003.

“As soon as we were alerted to the possible exposure of Sodium Dichromate, an environmental survey was conducted to evaluate typical exposure at Qarmat Ali. Results showed that the levels at the time were significantly below UK government guidance levels.”

A 2004 letter seen by Sky News suggested, however, that the MoD knew the levels of sodium dichromate were higher.

“Anyone who requires medical treatment can receive it through the Defence Medical Services and other appropriate services,” the MoD said.

“Veterans who believe they have suffered ill health due to service can apply for no-fault compensation under the War Pensions Scheme.”

Watters called on the government to hold an investigation into what happened at Qarmat Ali.

“We are the working class, we are ex-soldiers who have put our lives on the line and you’re turning a blind eye to us,” he said.

Garth added: “We felt let down at Qarmat Ali all those years ago, and we still feel let down now.”