In a landmark decision that could reshape US immigration policy, a federal judge has delivered a powerful blow to the controversial practice of detaining migrant children alongside their parents in immigration facilities.
The ruling, handed down by US District Judge Dolly Gee in California, declares that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) cannot systematically hold children in what she described as "jail-type" settings, regardless of whether they remain with their families.
A Legal Victory for Child Welfare
Judge Gee's decision stems from the landmark 1997 Flores settlement, which established nationwide standards for the treatment of minors in immigration custody. The ruling explicitly states that detaining children in secured facilities violates their rights under this long-standing agreement.
"The court finds that ICE's family detention programme violates the requirements of the Flores Agreement," Judge Gee stated in her 25-page ruling. "Children cannot be held in unlicensed facilities that operate as functional equivalents of jails."
Immediate Impact on Detained Families
The decision carries immediate consequences for hundreds of migrant families currently held in ICE facilities across the United States. Authorities must now rapidly develop alternative arrangements that comply with child welfare standards.
Legal advocates celebrated the ruling as a crucial victory. "This confirms what we've argued for years - that detaining children in prison-like conditions is both illegal and morally indefensible," said attorney Carlos Holguín, who represented the child plaintiffs.
Political Fallout and Administration Response
The Trump-era policy of family detention has faced consistent legal challenges, but this ruling represents one of the most significant setbacks to the practice. The Biden administration now faces pressure to develop more humane alternatives while maintaining border security.
ICE officials have indicated they will review the decision, but immigrant rights organisations are urging immediate compliance. "There is no justification for keeping children behind bars," declared a spokesperson for the National Immigrant Justice Center.
What Comes Next?
The ruling doesn't completely eliminate family detention but imposes strict limitations on how children can be housed. Alternatives such as case management programmes, ankle monitors, and community-based supervision are likely to see expanded use.
Legal experts suggest this decision could influence similar cases nationwide and potentially lead to the permanent dismantling of large-scale family detention centres that have drawn international criticism.
