Very soon now, since the case has been briefed and argued, the Ninth Circuit ought to slap Team Tangerine 2.0’s appeal of its complete loss down in Los Angeles — in this litigation percolating since Ronald Reagan was last at 1600 Penn. Yikes — the machinery is clearly broken, here. [We need comprehensive Congressional revamping here — that’s a blue project for January — and beyond.]
Here’s the latest 11 page summary of the posture of this portion of the federal class action case — which seeks to avoid the renewed torture of CHILDREN… that Trump regularly inflicted during his first term — and that was ultimately enjoined, by the US Supremes.
Yet he is back at his monstrous efforts, with the aid of the ugly gargoyle, Stephen Miller. Do read all 11 pages, here:
…[In] its August 2025 order, the district court concluded that Plaintiffs’ evidence of extended detention in CBP custody — including young children detained in holding cells for weeks at a time — “likely violates the FSA.” 1-SER-8. But the district court noted recent declines in time in custody and gave the Government the benefit of the doubt that this “indicates that CBP is aware of the issue and is working to resolve it.” 1-SER-8-9. The district court requested further reports from the CBP Juvenile Coordinator “to assess whether further enforcement of the Agreement is warranted….”
By August 2026, the district court had clear evidence that CBP had not resolved the problem of prolonged detention in temporary holding cells. The district court noted — based on the Government’s own reports — that average time in custody for children in family units in U.S. Border Patrol facilities on the Southwest border exceeded 145 hours in March 2026, or more than six days. Opinion Appointing SM and IM at 5. Plaintiffs provided evidence that children were detained in CBP holding cells for over a week — and in some cases multiple weeks — in 2026. Id. at 6. Citing the Government’s own declarations, the district court emphasized that “[t]he parties have long acknowledged that 72 hours is a reasonable benchmark given that CBP facilities are intended only for short-term use and are not suitable for minors for longer periods of time.” Id at 6; see also 1-SER-14 (“CBP facilities, by design, are not suitable for minors for long periods of time….”)
Given these findings, the district court determined independent monitoring of time in custody was necessary. Opinion Appointing SM and IM at 7. Even then, the district court limited its monitoring order to the specific CBP sectors where it had previously identified violations in its August 2025 order, notwithstanding Plaintiffs’ evidence that children were also regularly detained for over 72 hours in other sectors….
What on Earth could be wrong with these… monsters?! Were they dropped on their pointy heads, as babies? Who could look on and just let this happen? Damnation.
नमस्ते
