Appeals court rules Trump admin must provide hygiene products in migrant facilities

[Mrs. Overall]

Source: The Hill

A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld a previous court order mandating that the Trump administration must provide basic personal hygiene items to children in detention at facilities in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas.

The ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Fransisco hands a loss to the Trump administration, which had challenged a lower court decision two years ago ordering U.S. officials to provide basic personal hygiene items as well as adequate sleeping conditions, temperatures and food and water to children in detention at facilities in the Rio Grande Valley.

The appeals court's ruling essentially backs the two-decade old Flores agreement, which mandates key aspects of how immigrant children can be held by authorities, including that they be kept under the “least restrictive conditions” possible.

“Assuring that children eat enough edible food, drink clean water, are housed in hygienic facilities with sanitary bathrooms, have soap and toothpaste, and are not sleep-deprived are without doubt essential to the children’s safety,” the appeals court panel ruled.

Read more: https://thehill.com/latino/457573-appeals-court-rules-trump-administration-must-provide-personal-hygiene-products-in

[Maxheader]

1. That's great!!!

Keep the winger pervs away...I want professional staff dealing with the children...

[Gregory Peccary]

2. It's just sick that this even has to go through the courts

I'm so ashamed of what this country is becoming.

[Duppers]

5. +100

It's the epitome of Republican rule.

[catrose]

8. Yes, it just enrages me that the court has to say such things.

And who's going to see that it's enforced?

I worked volunteer disaster relief for many years, and the gaps between the conditions I was required to maintain and what these concentration camps are like is about the size of the Grand Canyon.

And in a country where the cops will call CPS if you let your kid go across the street to play unsupervised in a park, why does ICE get a pass for rounding up parents who were going to pick up their children, leaving them abandoned?

[gopiscrap]

12. +1,000%

[demmiblue]

3. As if this needed to be litigated in the first place.

Fucking monsters.

[Igel]

11. And yet it was.

I think this is the case were the first judgement was a couple of years ago (making in 2017), based on the state of the detention facilities in 2015.

The news made it sound as though the case was the direct result of the post-January-2017 state of affairs, but it wasn't.

That, of course, puts the "fucking monsters" pre-January 2017, making it disparagement of prominent Democratic representatives and officials.

[The Liberal Lion]

4. That this had to get a court involved shows just how far this imposter government

has sullied the reputation of the United States. After Abu Ghraib you would think we had reached our low point. Nope, that was just the rehearsal dinner. This shit must stop. We must not allow these things to happen ever again in the name of the people of the United States. We failed to prosecute Bush for war crimes. We must see trump pay for his crimes and all those who supported his orange, arrogant and incompetent ass. Execution is too good and too easy. They must be forced to live the rest of their unnatural lives out in the conditions they are now making others suffer under. That would be justice.

[The Blue Flower]

6. Who will make sure they comply?

Is there an enforcement provision in the ruling?

[LanternWaste]

7. That he needs a court to tell him this illustrates the depth of his idiocy and shamelessness nt

[cstanleytech]

9. Just to bad Trump and those in his administration are unlikely to be held criminally liable

for the children's conditions.

[Scurrilous]

10. K&R