Honduran family freed from detention after lawsuit against ICE courthouse arrests
The lawsuit filed on behalf of the mother identified as 'Ms. Z,' her 6-year-old son and her 9-year-old daughter, said they were arrested outside the courtroom after an immigration court hearing in Los Angeles. They had been held for weeks in the Dilley Immigration Processing Center in Texas. Their identities have not been released because of concerns for their safety.
The lawsuit said that the family entered the U.S. legally using a Biden-era appointment app and that their arrest violated their Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizure and their Fifth Amendment right to due process.
The family's lawyers said the boy had also recently undergone chemotherapy treatment for leukemia and his mother feared his health was declining while in detention.
The family was released late Wednesday while their lawsuit was still pending, and they went to a shelter in South Texas before they plan to return to their lives in the Los Angeles area, said Columbia Law School professor Elora Mukherjee, one of the lawyers representing the family.
'They will go back to their lives, to church, and school, and the family will continue to pursue their asylum case. And hopefully the little boy will get the medical attention he needs,' Mukherjee said. 'They never should have been arrested and detained in the first place. We are grateful they have been released.'
Department of Homeland Security officials did not immediately respond to an email request for comment. Last week, the agency posted on social media that the boy 'has been seen regularly by medical personnel since arriving at the Dilley facility.'
Starting in May, the country has seen large-scale arrests in which asylum-seekers appearing at routine hearings have been arrested outside courtrooms as part of the White House's mass deportation effort. In many cases, a judge will grant a government lawyer's request to dismiss deportation proceedings and then U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers will arrest the person and place them on 'expedited removal,' a fast track to deportation.
Lawyers for the 'Z' family said their lawsuit was the first one filed on behalf of children to challenge the ICE courthouse arrest policy.
There have been other similar lawsuits, including in New York, where a federal judge ruled last month that federal immigration authorities can't make civil arrests at the state's courthouses or arrest anyone going there for a proceeding.
'The Z family's release demonstrates the power we have when we fight back against harmful, un-American policies,' said Kate Gibson Kumar, staff attorney for the Beyond Borders Program of the Texas Civil Rights Project.
The family's lawyers have said that during their hearing before a judge, the mother said they wished to continue their cases for asylum. Homeland Security moved to dismiss their cases, and the judge immediately granted that motion.
When they stepped out of the courtroom, they found men in civilian clothing believed to be ICE agents who arrested the family, Mukherjee said. They spent about 11 hours at an immigrant processing center in Los Angeles and were each only given an apple, a small packet of cookies, a juice box and water.
At one point, an officer near the boy lifted his shirt, revealing his gun. The boy urinated on himself and was left in wet clothing until the next morning, Mukherjee said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
2 hours ago
- Toronto Star
A year before declaring independence, colonists offered ‘Olive Branch' petition to King George III
NEW YORK (AP) — Alarmed by the policies of President Donald Trump, millions turned out last month for protests around the United States and overseas. Mindful of next year's 250th anniversary of American independence, organizers called the movement 'No Kings.'
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
A year before declaring independence, colonists offered ‘Olive Branch' petition to King George III
NEW YORK (AP) — Alarmed by the policies of President Donald Trump, millions turned out last month for protests around the United States and overseas. Mindful of next year's 250th anniversary of American independence, organizers called the movement 'No Kings.' Had the same kind of rallies been called for in the summer of 1775, the response likely would have been more cautious. 'It ('No Kings') was probably a minority opinion in July 1775,' says H.W. Brands, a prize-winning scholar and chair of the history department at the University of Texas at Austin. 'There was a lot of passion for revolution in New England, but that was different from the rest of the country,' says Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Joseph Ellis. 'There were still people who don't want to drawn into what they feared was an unnecessary war.' This month marks the 250th anniversary — the semiquincentennial — of a document enacted almost exactly a year before the Declaration of Independence: 'The Olive Branch Petition,' ratified July 5, 1775 by the Continental Congress. Its primary author was John Dickinson, a Pennsylvanian whose writing skills led some to call him the 'Penman of the Revolution,' and would stand as a final, desperate plea to reconcile with Britain. They put forth a pre-revolutionary argument The notion of 'No Kings' is a foundation of democracy. But over the first half of 1775 Dickinson and others still hoped that King George III could be reasoned with and would undo the tax hikes and other alleged abuses they blamed on the British Parliament and other officials. Ellis calls it the 'Awkward Interval,' when Americans had fought the British in Lexington and Concord and around Bunker Hill, while holding off from a full separation. 'Public opinion is changing during this time, but it still would have been premature to issue a declaration of independence,' says Ellis, whose books include 'Founding Brothers,' 'The Cause' and the upcoming 'The Great Contradiction.' The Continental Congress projected unity in its official statements. But privately, like the colonies overall, members differed. Jack Rakove, a professor of history at Stanford University and author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning 'Original Meanings,' noted that delegates to Congress ranged from 'radicals' such as Samuel Adams who were avid for independence to such 'moderates' as Dickinson and New York's John Jay. The Olive Branch resolution balanced references to 'the delusive pretences, fruitless terrors, and unavailing severities' administered by British officials with dutiful tributes to shared ties and to the king's 'royal magnanimity and benevolence.' '(N)otwithstanding the sufferings of your loyal Colonists during the course of this present controversy, our Breasts retain too tender a regard for the Kingdom from which we derive our Origin to request such a Reconciliation as might in any manner be inconsistent with her Dignity or her welfare,' the sometimes obsequious petition reads in part. The American Revolution didn't arise at a single moment but through years of anguished steps away from the 'mother' country — a kind of weaning that at times suggested a coming of age, a young person's final departure from home. In letters and diaries written in the months before July 1775, American leaders often referred to themselves as children, the British as parents and the conflict a family argument. Edmund Pendleton, a Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, urged 'a reconciliation with Our mother Country.' Jay, who would later help negotiate the treaty formally ending the Revolutionary War, proposed informing King George that 'your majesty's American subjects' are 'bound to your majesty by the strongest ties of allegiance and affection and attached to their parent country by every bond that can unite societies.' In the Olive Branch paper, Dickinson would offer tribute to 'the union between our Mother country and these colonies.' An early example of 'peace through strength' The Congress, which had been formed the year before, relied in the first half of 1775 on a dual strategy that now might be called 'peace through strength,' a blend of resolve and compromise. John Adams defined it as 'to hold the sword in one hand, the olive branch in the other.' Dickinson's petition was a gesture of peace. A companion document, 'The Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms,' was a statement of resolve. The 1775 declaration was drafted by Thomas Jefferson, who a year later would be the principal writer of the Declaration of Independence, revised by Dickinson and approved by the Congress on July 6. The language anticipated the Declaration of Independence with its condemnation of the British for 'their intemperate Rage for unlimited Domination' and its vows to 'make known the Justice of our Cause.' But while the Declaration of Independence ends with the 13 colonies 'absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown,' the authors in 1775 assured a nervous public 'that we mean not to dissolve that Union which has so long and so happily subsisted between us, and which we sincerely wish to see restored.' 'Necessity has not yet driven us into that desperate Measure, or induced us to excite any other Nation to war against them,' they wrote. John Adams and Benjamin Franklin were among the peers of Dickinson who thought him naive about the British, and were unfazed when the king refused even to look at the Olive Branch petition and ruled that the colonies were in a state of rebellion. Around the same time Dickinson was working on his draft, the Continental Congress readied for further conflict. It appointed a commander of the newly-formed Continental Army, a renowned Virginian whom Adams praised as 'modest and virtuous … amiable, generous and brave.' His name: George Washington. His ascension, Adams wrote, 'will have a great effect, in cementing and securing the Union of these Colonies.'
Toronto Star
2 hours ago
- Toronto Star
US military's attempt to retain strategic land for training runs into Native Hawaiian opposition
HONOLULU (AP) — A high-altitude plateau on the Big Island is the only place in Hawaii where thousands of ground forces can practice firing live munitions. It's also a place many Native Hawaiians consider the spiritual heart of the island. The U.S. military wants to keep training at this spot, called Pohakuloa, so it's ready to quickly send troops to Asia and the Pacific. Its importance to the U.S. is only growing as China becomes more assertive, particularly regarding Taiwan.
