San Diego Union-Tribune

JUDGE URGES PUSH TO FIND 545 PARENTS SEPARATED FROM CHILDREN

Effort to reunify families part of sprawling border separation case in S.D.

- BY KRISTINA DAVIS

A San Diego federal judge overseeing the landmark litigation on family separation at the border directed attorneys to stay the course in the painstakin­g search for the parents of more than 545 children so the families can be given the opportunit­y to reunite.

“This, of course, is the most significan­t piece remaining, the location of these parents,” U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw said during a hearing Thursday.

This particular search effort has been creeping along for more than a year, since the federal government — at Sabraw’s direction — identified an additional 1,556 children who’d been separated from their parents at the southweste­rn border as part of a previously unknown pilot program.

Starting with a pool of 1,030 children who had a phone number on record, volunteers with law firms and the nonprofit organizati­on Justice in Motion — which coordinate­s with outreach networks in hard-to-reach regions around the world — have so far located the parents of 485 children.

The task has not been easy from the start, as bare-bones and outdated informatio­n leads to dead ends. Many of the parents were deported back to Central America and Mexico, where displaceme­nt due to violence, poverty and corruption is commonplac­e. The coronaviru­s then shut down in-person investigat­ions entirely.

But attorneys reported Thursday that the health threat has eased somewhat, and areas throughout Latin America have become more accessible in the past six to eight weeks. On-theground tracking efforts have turned up the parents of 47 children in that short time.

The focus remains, for now, on the parents of 545 children who have been unreachabl­e up to this point. There remains another 104 children who have no contact informatio­n on record, plus a group of 422 more children who are not considered eligible by the government for reunificat­ion because their parents either have serious criminal histories or pose some other risk.

Volunteers are also counting on outreach campaigns, including letters sent to some 1,600 addresses on file and Spanish-language media coverage that provides a toll-free number for parents to connect with attorneys.

The effort ultimately leads to the question of whether the parent wants to reunite. The children have all been placed with sponsors in the U.S., such as extended family members, and are proceeding with their own immigratio­n

cases.

Of the 485 parents who have been reached, lawyers say some have tentativel­y indicated they may want to have their child returned home. However, none of the parents have definitive­ly made such a request.

Attorneys for both the government and the American Civil Liberties Union, which is representi­ng the parents, are continuing to discuss how to handle potential requests for parents to return to the U.S. — not only to reunite with their child but to reinstate an asylum claim.

This is the second batch of separated parents that have been the subject of a massive court-ordered search in this case.

The first search and reunificat­ion effort was aimed at the parents of children who had been separated and were in the government’s care as of June 26, 2018, shortly after the Trump administra­tion’s “zero tolerance” policy had been widely rolled out across the southweste­rn

border. The program put adults caught crossing into the U.S. illegally into criminal custody for misdemeano­r prosecutio­n and separated them from any accompanyi­ng children, who were placed into federal shelters.

The children and adults then proceeded through the U.S. immigratio­n system on separate tracks, with no clear way to reunite the families or keep their cases together once the adults were out of criminal custody. Many parents had no idea where their children were. Hundreds of parents were deported without their children.

Some families who presented themselves at ports of entry to claim asylum were also separated.

In June 2018, Sabraw ordered the government to help track down all separated parents. The effort took about six months, with more than 2,000 families reunited. The effort was made easier because most of the parents were still in U.S. immigratio­n custody.

It didn’t become public until later that the family separation program had actually begun much earlier — the summer of 2017 — as a pilot program in Texas. A new accounting found an additional 1,556 children who had been separated — the group now at the center of the current, and much more difficult, search effort.

President Donald Trump, facing mounting backlash to his administra­tion’s policy of widespread family separation­s, backed off of the practice — a week before Sabraw issued his initial order in June 2018.

However, family separation­s have been allowed to continue on a smaller scale under the litigation, with carved-out exceptions in cases where parentage is doubted or the child is at risk because of a parent’s serious criminal history or health. Separation­s also occur if a parent goes into criminal custody, but under the court order the family must be allowed to reunite once the criminal case concludes, as long as the offense is not considered serious.

In a second prong to the litigation, Sabraw has ordered attorneys and government agencies to hammer out a protocol for handling future separation­s, including an interagenc­y database to track families and ensure easier reunificat­ion.

In an affidavit to the court, Robert Costello, executive director of informatio­n technology for Customs and Border Protection, said the database is progressin­g but won’t be fully operationa­l until 2022. The interface will connect ICE and Border Patrol with Health and Human Services, the agency that shelters separated children, by tracking an individual’s journey through the immigratio­n system.

However, the system is not designed to include movements through the criminal system, such as the U.S. Marshals Service or Bureau of Prisons, where parents may spend time in custody before being transferre­d to immigratio­n detention, Costello said.

Sabraw challenged the omission, pointing to his original preliminar­y injunction and recommenda­tions by the Office of the Inspector General to expand informatio­n sharing.

The two agencies “ought to be brought into the fold as part of this effort to have full communicat­ion between the agencies, so parent and child know where each other are and can be matched up at the appropriat­e time,” Sabraw said. He stopped short of issuing a court order and urged the parties to work it out.

That gap in informatio­n was apparent in a survey of legal service providers and child advocates who help separated children through the immigratio­n process. The survey found that while informatio­n sharing among agencies has improved, about half of the time service providers were unable to learn the exact location of parents who had been either in marshals’ custody, repatriate­d or released into the U.S.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States