All this folderol about a "Flores Settlement Agreement" has made me look it up, as I have said here earlier. After reading it, I wonder if the people in charge have either read it or otherwise have heard what's in it.
In 2001, the Federal Government and the Flores plaintiffs stipulated that the Flores Settlement Agreement would terminate 45 days following the Federal Government's publication of final regulations implementing this Agreement. Flores v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 898, 903 (9th Cir. 2016); Flores v. Johnson, 212 F. Supp. 3d 864, 868 n.1 (C.D. Cal. 2015), aff'd in part, rev'd in part sub nom. Flores v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 898 (9th Cir. 2016).
In other words, all the Federal Government had to do was adopt regulations and end the Flores Settlement Agreement, but they have not done that in over 20 years. Flores v. Johnson, 212 F. Supp. 3d at 886.
Now the Federal Government has chosen instead to present what they call an "ex parte motion" to set key provisions of the Flores Settlement Agreement aside. In other words, they were for their agreement before they were against it. Download Flores v. Sessions Doc. No. 435.1 (Feds) Memorandum in Support of Ex Parte Motion for Relief From Flores Settlement Agreement Filed June 21 2018 (C.D. Cal. Case No. CV 85.4544 DMG (AGRx)).
Moreover, they have presented their motion to set aside their Settlement Agreement to the same Federal Judge who held in 2015 that ICE, the Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, breached the agreement by adopting a zero tolerance policy except that back then, they called it a "no-release policy," and by confining immigrant minor children in pens and prisons rather than looking for placements in licensed facilities which they had agreed to do.
So, to rephrase a famous saying so as to fit it more perfectly to this situation, "Incompetence is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result." Just sayin'.
Please Read The Disclaimer. ©2018 Dennis J. Wall. All Rights Reserved.
Comments