Judge Bars Abrupt Deportation of Guatemalan Children
The Globe and Mail - Moises Castillo/The Associated Press
On August 31st, District Court Judge Sparkle Sooknanan issued a temporary restraining order blocking the deportation of 10 Guatemalan migrant children back to their country of origin. The National Immigration Law Center filed the case L.G.M.L. v. Noem, arguing that the deportation of the children, all of whom are between the ages of 10 and 17, violates protections under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) and the right to due process. The center issued a statement explaining that the case does not fall under the “limited circumstances” for expedited removal. The case brings a delicate issue forward that involves migration law and concerns for children’s mental and emotional well-being.
Sooknanan’s decision extends to around 600 other Guatemalan children who are detained and have been identified for deportation. Becky Wolozin, senior attorney at the National Center for Youth Law (NCYL), explained that there was little to no “advance notice that this was happening,” and that the children were deported without their cases being heard in court, in violation of the proper procedure for deporting minors.
Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo and lawyers from the U.S. Justice Department claimed that the children were being sent to reunite with their families. Concerned families waited at a reception centre for returned migrants, only to be told that the children would not be coming home as planned. The children are currently being held in the Office of Refugee Resettlement’s (ORR) custody. The ORR is responsible for holding and caring for minors apprehended by agencies like ICE.
The experience of relocating to a different country and then suddenly being removed could have a significant psychological and material impact on the children involved in the case, especially given their age group. The children who arrived in the US alone experienced the emotional strain of being separated from their families and being under federal care in a foreign country. Research shows that sudden separation from family increases the risk of developing chronic mental health conditions and negatively impacts overall development. Being sheltered by the ORR may already be overwhelming for the children to acclimate to in a different country. The additional stress of experiencing sudden deportation, without warning or preparation, would inflict lasting trauma on children of a young age.
Furthermore, the lawsuit claims that if returned to Guatemala, the children would “face abuse, neglect, persecution, or torture.” The children represented by the National Immigration Law Center expressed that they wish to stay in the United States, due to unsafe conditions in Guatemala and neglectful and abusive treatment from their families. According to the lawsuit's argument, the children would be at risk of serious human rights abuses. The NILC also states that the children’s deportation would violate the government’s legal responsibility to protect minors from mistreatment or trafficking and the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.
Senior NCYL attorney Wolozin goes on to say that, "The government is trying to spin this as child protection, but it's not, it's child abuse. It wasn't orderly; it skipped all of the procedural protections." On the other hand, the Trump Administration still holds firm to its claim that deportation is important for family reunification. As White House Deputy Chief of Staff and advisor on immigration, Stephen Miller stated, “a Democrat judge is refusing to let them reunify with their parents.”
The arguments for L.G.M.L. v. Noem reflect conflict between the prioritization of family reunification for the Guatemalan children and providing legal protections and due process in immigration cases. The developments following the temporary ban on their deportation may have consequences for future immigration cases that have to do with legal protections for minors.