Migrants in U.S. custody describe life in 'ice boxes' and 'dog pounds'

[webfact]

Migrants in U.S. custody describe life in 'ice boxes' and 'dog pounds'

By Reade Levinson and Kristina Cooke

 

A Customs and Border Patrol facility is shown in Chula Vista, California, U.S. July 17, 2018. REUTERS/Mike Blake

 

(Reuters) - During their detention last month in a U.S. Customs and Border Protection facility in Laredo, Texas, Karen and her two young sons were constantly cold. The family, which fled violence in Honduras, slept on a hard floor in a holding cell without mattresses, she said, their clothes still wet from crossing the Rio Grande.

 

“I can only hold one at a time to keep them warm. Whoever I am not holding is cold,” she said in one of more than 200 sworn statements filed this week in a long-running lawsuit challenging conditions for children in immigration custody.

 

The statements, which were taken in June and July and identify immigrants only by their first names, provide a rare window into life in Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facilities. Migrants like Karen and her children who crossed into the United States illegally, as well as those who applied for asylum at the border, are often held in such facilities before being released or transferred to longer-term detention centres.

 

A nursing mother named Serafin, who said she fled Mexico after a cartel member threatened to rape her and kill her baby, said she was given too little food at a facility in San Ysidro, California.

 

“I am not producing enough breast milk to feed my baby because I am not eating enough,” she said in her statement. “My daughter cries a lot because she is hungry.”

 

A woman named Mayra said her 9-year-old son became fearful after their detention in Nogales, Arizona, where he saw children separated from their parents.

 

“He saw someone bound with chains and asked me whether I would be chained in the same way," she said. “He wonders when we will get to the United States. I do not tell him that we are already here. He wouldn't believe that the United States would treat us this way.”

 

(To read more sworn statements from migrants, see: https://tmsnrt.rs/2LquAzn)

 

LONG-RUNNING LAWSUIT

The statements were taken by attorneys for plaintiffs in a case brought against the U.S. government in 1985 on behalf of 15-year-old Jenny L. Flores. A 1997 settlement in the lawsuit set standards for humane treatment of children in detention and ordered their prompt release in most cases.

 

This week, the plaintiffs filed papers alleging that the detention conditions described in the declarations violate the humane treatment standards set out in the settlement, including speedy release of children.

 

"We now see many in CBP custody for three to six days,” up from two to three days in prior months, said Peter Schey, the lead attorney for plaintiffs in the Flores case.

 

Reuters was unable to speak directly to the migrants who gave declarations because they weren't fully identified in the filing, and most of them are still in detention.

 

CBP referred requests for comment on the migrant statements to the Department of Justice, which declined to comment. In the past, CBP has defended conditions in its facilities.

 

In a report filed in the Flores case last month, CBP juvenile coordinator Henry Moak Jr. said that the department makes extensive efforts "to ensure all minors in CBP custody are treated with dignity, respect, and special concern for their particular vulnerability as minors."

 

He said parents and children he interviewed had "received meals and snacks; had access to drinking water, functioning toilets, and functioning sinks; and were held in rooms that were maintained at an appropriate temperature."

 

He also noted, however, that CBP should ensure that food was not kept past its expiration date and that custodial data was consistently entered into records.

 

Moak referred requests for comment to CBP.

 

'ICE BOXES' AND 'DOG POUNDS'

Reports of harsh conditions in CBP facilities have surfaced repeatedly for years, including again recently when the government began separating children and parents. The new declarations are remarkable both for the number of detainee voices and the consistency of detail in what they report.

 

While a few immigrants said that conditions were adequate, most described cold temperatures, too little food, difficult separations from their children and crowded cells without enough sleeping mats. They said latrines were dirty and lacked privacy and that lights stayed on day and night.

 

James Tomsheck, who served as assistant commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection for internal affairs from 2006 to 2014, told Reuters that the facilities were designed for brief stays.

 

"There is no question that the amount of time persons are being held at these, what are designed to be temporary detention facilities, has become much longer than it was intended."

 

Detainees refer to some of the facilities as “hieleras,” Spanish for “ice boxes” because they are so cold. Larger spaces with indoor fencing are referred to as "perreras" or “dog pounds.”

 

Children in the facilities were often held in separate cells from their parents, according to the statements.

 

A woman named Leydi, held in Chula Vista, California, described watching young children trying to touch their parents through metal fences.

 

“The mothers tried to reach their children, and I saw children pressing up against the fence of the cage to try to reach out," she said. "But officials pulled the children away and yelled at their mothers."

 

John Sandweg, acting director of ICE from 2013 to 2014, said the problems stem from the fact that holding areas were designed to lock up adults for just a few hours while CBP processed paperwork.

 

“They’re inappropriate, frankly, for children,” he said.

 

Graphic: Life in the 'Dog Pound' - https://tmsnrt.rs/2LquAzn

 

(Additional reporting by Scot Paltrow in New York; Editing by Sue Horton and Marla Dickerson)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-07-19

[canuckamuck]

We were only trying to sneak into the country and ignore all the laws and security systems. Why are they making us uncomfortable?

[Scott]

15 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

We were only trying to sneak into the country and ignore all the laws and security systems. Why are they making us uncomfortable?

The problem is there are numerous accounts of asylum seekers, crossing legally have been put in detention and their children removed, for no good reason.   Here's one example:

 

"Court records and individual cases discovered by The Texas Tribune indicate that a number of asylum seekers who came to international bridges in Texas and California were separated from their children anyway — or were not able to cross the bridge at all after encountering armed Customs and Border Protection agents on the bridge. And experts argue there’s no basis to the government’s claim that there aren’t enough resources to process asylum seekers. "

 

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/05/migrants-seeking-asylum-legally-ports-entry-turned-away-separated-fami/

 

There are many other examples from across the border, so it's not unique to one or two crossings.  

 

[Scott]

The government is putting people seeking asylum in a conundrum.   If you get cross legally and seek asylum, you are not eligible to be bonded out f immigration detention by a judge.   If you cross illegally you are.   Those crossing legally are held at the total discretion of ICE.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

25 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

We were only trying to sneak into the country and ignore all the laws and security systems. Why are they making us uncomfortable?

If I and my family were facing a life of poverty in a society with little hope of education or any improving prospects for my children south of the border, I’d do what ever I could to get into the US.

 

Including committing the misdemeanor of crossing the boarder without a visa.

 

Why wouldn’t I or any parent want to do whatever they can for their children to share the American Dream?

 

Build a wall against that and criminalise people for doing exactly what the forefathers of almost every single American did is not protecting anything other than privilege on the basis of where you were born.

 

I can think of nothing more unAmerican.

 

[canuckamuck]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If I and my family were facing a life of poverty in a society with little hope of education or any improving prospects for my children south of the border, I’d do what ever I could to get into the US.

 

Including committing the misdemeanor of crossing the boarder without a visa.

 

Why wouldn’t I or any parent want to do whatever they can for their children to share the American Dream?

 

Build a wall against that and criminalise people for doing exactly what the forefathers of almost every single American did is not protecting anything other than privilege on the basis of where you were born.

 

I can think of nothing more unAmerican.

 

Other than the British colonization, immigrants to America have had to follow the rules. Throwing out the rules is anti American.

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Other than the British colonization, immigrants to America have had to follow the rules. Throwing out the rules is anti American.

Spend a little time educating yourself so that you don’t have to spend so much time broadcasting your ignorance:

 

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/did-my-family-really-come-legally-todays-immigration-laws-created-a-new-reality

[mtls2005]

11 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Throwing out the rules is anti American.

 

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

 

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.  Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

 

They're called "Amendments".

 

I'd submit that "throwing out the rules: is VERY, VERY, VERY AMERICAN.

 

Here a couple relevant to the topic...

 

 

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

 

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

 

"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law"

 

 

 

 

 

[Tug]

Some one comes to you asking asylum give it extend your hand your heart you DONT lock them up and put there kids in cages it’s unamerican un Christian un Buddhist un Islamic it plane sucks if the request is invalid send them home 

[Scott]

32 minutes ago, Tug said:

Some one comes to you asking asylum give it extend your hand your heart you DONT lock them up and put there kids in cages it’s unamerican un Christian un Buddhist un Islamic it plane sucks if the request is invalid send them home 

There is a system in place to sort of pre-screen asylum applicants for a credible fear.   Those who don't have that are generally set for deportation.   They can request a full hearing with an Immigration Judge.  

 

The pre-screening is set up to verify that the circumstances are credible and likely could have occurred.   It does not necessarily look at the specifics, which will be dealt with in detail later.  

[connda]

They should come to Thailand illegally and then compare the conditions.

[Matt96]

and what were they expecting? Ritz-Carlton hotel on expense of the US taxpayers?!

 

 

don't try to sneak in the country illegally and you will have no troubles.

[Matt96]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If I and my family were facing a life of poverty in a society with little hope of education or any improving prospects for my children south of the border, I’d do what ever I could to get into the US.

 

Including committing the misdemeanor of crossing the boarder without a visa.

and Americans would do whatever it takes to keep you outside. you made a choice to break the US law? face the consequences! the US dont owe you anything.

 

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Why wouldn’t I or any parent want to do whatever they can for their children to share the American Dream?

they can share the American dream at their own country. and if they turned it to a shithole - it's their own fault not anyone else's

 

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Build a wall against that and criminalise people for doing exactly what the forefathers of almost every single American did

their forefathers came from small European countries with lack of land and bad climate. they built their own new country from scratch.

there is no lack of land in Mexico or any other country down the map. their climate is very suitable for agriculture and any other activity.  but people there turned their own countries in hell therefore want to come to the US to make it the same shit hole.  their problem lies not in their environment, land or climate conditions, but within their own minds - in their destructive rotten mentality which leaded them to misery, wars, dictatorships, uprisings, gangs, drug trafficking, poverty etc.

 

they run away not from natural conditions but from themselves and therefore will never succeed. they will make their life better in the US on expense of making it worse for locals.

 

Where did Mara Salvatrucha, for example, come from?

[UncleTouchyFingers]

 

5 hours ago, Scott said:

Those crossing legally are held at the total discretion of ICE.

 

This statement from Scott is extremely obfuscating. 

 

There should be no way that an illegal alien can cross a border illegally and "be legal" in the process. 

 

There should be no way that an illegal alien can claim asylum and cross a border "legally" and the government allows them through. 

 

Not American? 

 

You. Do. Not. Enter. 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If I and my family were facing a life of poverty in a society with little hope of education or any improving prospects for my children south of the border, I’d do what ever I could to get into the US.

 

Including committing the misdemeanor of crossing the boarder without a visa.

 

Why wouldn’t I or any parent want to do whatever they can for their children to share the American Dream?

 

Build a wall against that and criminalise people for doing exactly what the forefathers of almost every single American did is not protecting anything other than privilege on the basis of where you were born.

 

I can think of nothing more unAmerican.

 

 

Arent you Canadian or something? 

 

So, open borders then. Because thats what you're advocating here. Open borders. And thats never gonna happen.

 

You cant just come to the USA because you're poor. Never gonna happen. 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Spend a little time educating yourself so that you don’t have to spend so much time broadcasting your ignorance:

 

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/did-my-family-really-come-legally-todays-immigration-laws-created-a-new-reality

Yep, im sure thats an unbiased and objective "source". 

 

Isnt that right, Chomper.....

 

 

 

[oldrunner]

No one, to my knowledge, INVITED you to break the laws by invading the United States. Go back to where you came from.

[Ulic]

11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Spend a little time educating yourself so that you don’t have to spend so much time broadcasting your ignorance:

 

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/did-my-family-really-come-legally-todays-immigration-laws-created-a-new-reality

 

Nothing to be learned from this. A totally self-serving agenda piece. Times have changed. It is now very difficult to immigrate to countries like the US and Australia. If you follow this articles logic after you have become a convicted criminal the UK government will give you free transportation to Australia. Where once these countries needed immigration, they now restrict it. 

[Scott]

6 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

 

This statement from Scott is extremely obfuscating. 

 

There should be no way that an illegal alien can cross a border illegally and "be legal" in the process. 

 

There should be no way that an illegal alien can claim asylum and cross a border "legally" and the government allows them through. 

 

Not American? 

 

You. Do. Not. Enter. 

You seem to imply that I somehow have a strong opinion on this issue.   I don't.   Every country has rules and laws about entry.   When someone presents themselves for entry to the US and claims asylum, they are to be provided with entry and a chance to defend that claim.   If you cross illegally, it is a misdemeanor, and you still have the right to claim asylum.   A 2nd illegal crossing is a felony.  

 

Generally, if you claim asylum, you are pre-screened to determined if it is a reasonable claim.   If, for example, you claim you face persecution because you are Catholic and you're from Mexico, it won't fly and you will face deportation.  

 

If a country does not want to take refugees or asylum seekers, cancel the existing agreements and protocols and you do not have to.   In the case of the US, it might be wise to not limit military excursions into some countries.   These produce a lot of refugees and instability.

 

The number of immigrants has always been determined by Congress.   It will vary according to the needs of the country.   It's often businesses that want the numbers upped when they need labor.  The same is true about illegals crossing to work.   A lot of people are more than happy to hire them knowing full well they are illegal. 

 

I don't know anyone who supports illegal immigration.   I certainly do not.  I do care about what happens to people once they are admitted to the country.    Policies cannot be changed willy-nilly without having a knock-on affect.

 

[bedouin1990]

 As usual, with its leftist orientation, Reuters has missed the point. They did not look at conditions in Mexican refugee centers. Printing that a woman and her children were "cold" in south Texas in May or June is laughable to someone, like me, who lives there.Mexican prisons make Thailand's look like a Bible School retreat.The one big issue left out of this never ending immigration debate is that America has provided an escape valve for somewhere between 10 and 20 million Latinos.  Have they stayed home and fought to improve their own countries?  NO. Unlike people in Iran, Syria and Yemen. Liberals who think from emotion rather than reason-- go sell crazy somewhere else. We are all stocked up here!

[Credo]

1 hour ago, bedouin1990 said:

 As usual, with its leftist orientation, Reuters has missed the point. They did not look at conditions in Mexican refugee centers. Printing that a woman and her children were "cold" in south Texas in May or June is laughable to someone, like me, who lives there.Mexican prisons make Thailand's look like a Bible School retreat.The one big issue left out of this never ending immigration debate is that America has provided an escape valve for somewhere between 10 and 20 million Latinos.  Have they stayed home and fought to improve their own countries?  NO. Unlike people in Iran, Syria and Yemen. Liberals who think from emotion rather than reason-- go sell crazy somewhere else. We are all stocked up here!

Have you spent a lot of time in Mexican prisons?     Your hold up a false equivalency.   The conditions in the US for refugees has nothing to do with either Mexico or Thailand.   

 

As far as staying home and helping to rebuild their country.   For many people, facing persecution, they will not have the opportunity to help build anything.   Just fill up graveyards.   

 

 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

1 minute ago, Credo said:

Have you spent a lot of time in Mexican prisons?     Your hold up a false equivalency.   The conditions in the US for refugees has nothing to do with either Mexico or Thailand.   

 

As far as staying home and helping to rebuild their country.   For many people, facing persecution, they will not have the opportunity to help build anything.   Just fill up graveyards.   

 

People always frame this like every single one of these illegal aliens are fleeing prosecution in their home country. 

 

They aren't. 

 

The majority are simply broke economic migrants, and being a broke economic migrant isnt a qualifier to enter the USA, or any country that I can think of, and yet they are still allowed through. And that is wrong. 

 

I read something the other day that stated that only 60% of these people even show up for their court dates after being released into the USA. Thats hundreds of thousands of people and growing. 

 

And Democrat politicians along with their liberal outrage machine call people racists and nazis for not supporting this open borders asylum nonsense. 

[Scott]

And those broke economic migrants will be deported in short order.  

 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

1 minute ago, Scott said:

And those broke economic migrants will be deported in short order.  

 

No they wont, and you know it. How are they going to be deported if they aren't even showing up for court dates? How are they going to be deported if they know full well they just need to make it to a sanctuary city and will be protected once they get there? You even got some Democrat politicians openly stating they want to abolish ICE, Scott. 

 

Its ridiculous and extremely dishonest to state that all these people will be deported. 

[Scott]

First it is a myth that most don't show up for their hearing.   Most due.   85% of families show up for the hearing and 98% of those who have legal representation show up.    The lower end of the figures is  60% so most, in fact do show up.

 

Sanctuary cities will not necessarily protect anyone.  The local law enforcement, however, does not review citizenship status in its ordinary enforcement of laws.   That is the responsibility of ICE.

 

Abolishing ICE is nothing more than a sound bite.   It would not be supported by any but a very small group of people.  

 

I am not sure who the 'they' you are referring to.   There are asylum seekers and there are illegal immigrants.   Many of the illegals, with no claim to asylum, are simply returned to Mexico.   With those from Latin American countries, it is not quite so easy. 

 

Again, I don't know anyone who advocates for allowing illegals into the US. 

 

 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

The lower end of the figures is  60% so most, in fact do show up.

 

One hundred and forty thousand people (140,000 human beings who procreate and give birth on American soil and inherently vote Democrat) didnt show up for court, Scott, from 2012 to 2016.

 

That is a HUGE number of illegal aliens that arent being deported, because they arent showing up for court. And thats just the ones that get caught up in the system. Nevermind the MILLIONS that are already here illegally. 

 

So im going to rate your statement that "broke economic migrants will be deported in short order" as categorically and unequivocally pants-on-fire false. 

 

7 hours ago, Scott said:

I don't know anyone who supports illegal immigration. 

 

20 minutes ago, Scott said:

Again, I don't know anyone who advocates for allowing illegals into the US. 

 

You've felt the need to say this twice now. I honestly cant comprehend how you can type this out with a straight face. 

 

Two words:

 

Sanctuary. Cities.

[Scott]

You apparently aren't taking into account the Zero Tolerance policy in your statements.   The treatment of many of the people arriving is questionable, but the fact that there is a definite crackdown is apparent. 

 

 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

11 minutes ago, Scott said:

You apparently aren't taking into account the Zero Tolerance policy in your statements.   The treatment of many of the people arriving is questionable, but the fact that there is a definite crackdown is apparent. 

 

Get back to me when there aren't millions of actual Americans living in absolute poverty and I might give a shit.