Workers Detained In Massive Tennessee Immigration Raid Sue ICE

Written by Walter Ewing

Workers who were detained during the first large-scale workplace immigration raid under the Trump administration filed a class action lawsuit against the government on Thursday. The raid, which took place in April 2018, decimated a meat processing plant in Bean Station, a rural community outside of Knoxville, Tennessee. 

The raid by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents resulted in the detention of almost 100 primarily Mexican workers. The suit alleges violation of the workers’ rights against illegal seizures and to equal protection under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. 

This raid was a response to a criminal investigation of the family-owned plant for tax evasion, filing false tax returns, and hiring undocumented immigrants. The owners pled guilty to the charges in August 2018. 

The suit alleges that, even though federal officers only had a search warrant to investigate the owners’ tax evasion, ICE agents used the warrant as a pretext to carry out a discriminatory mass immigration enforcement. Officers allegedly raided the plant and detained every worker in the plant who looked Latino, regardless of their actual citizenship or documentation. 

In fact, many of the workers weren’t asked about documentation until hours into the raid, at which point many had already been handcuffed, transported to a new location, and held in isolation, unable to contact family members or attorneys. At the same time, white workers were neither detained nor questioned about their documentation and were allegedly permitted to leave. 

Two of the named plaintiffs also allege that they were assaulted by ICE officers, including one plaintiff who was punched in the face and another plaintiff who had a gun pointed to his head without reason. The plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages due to the governments’ violation of their rights. 

However, the impact of the raid extends beyond the fate of the detained workers or the owners of the plant. According to Meredith Stewart, senior supervising attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center: 

“What happened in East Tennessee was law enforcement overreach, plain and simple. We as a nation have a shared set of ideals, rooted in the Bill of Rights: we have a right to be free from racial profiling and unlawful arrests. If we are not willing to uphold those ideals for everyone in this country, then we are all at risk of losing our rights.” 

History has taught us that these sorts of immigration raids will do little to deter unauthorized immigration. Raids have devastating effects on families, businesses, and local economies. They also generate trauma in children who are separated from their parents. Reports indicate that a day after the Bean Station raid, at least 600 students did not show up for school. Another negative outcome is that these tactics make immigrant communities less safe. In communities where crackdowns take place, residents are less likely to cooperate with the police or report crimes for fear of being arrested or deported. 

Raids not only affect the social fabric of communities, but their economies as well. In Tennessee, immigrant-led households paid $1.5 billion in federal taxes and $493.9 million in state and local taxes in 2014 alone. If immigrants are unable to go to work for fear of being apprehended and deported, their economic contributions are greatly diminished. 

As the Trump administration pursues its strategy of spreading fear throughout immigrant communities, more large-scale worksite raids like Bean Station’s are a real possibility. The unfortunate truth is that the administration is willing to sacrifice families, communities, and local economies throughout the country in its quest for greater levels of immigration enforcement. 

Source: http://immigrationimpact.com/

http://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4028-Workers-Detained-in-masiive-raid-sue-ICE.html

Surprise Government Inspection Finds Nooses in ICE Detention Center, Doctors Refusing to Treat Immigrant Detainees

Written by Melissa Cruz

When government officials conducted a surprise inspection of the immigration detention center in Adelanto, California this May, they were met by many signs of serious neglect and abuse, including the chilling sight of nooses made from twisted bed sheets hanging in multiple cells.

This abuse and neglect are highlighted in a new report by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) and show how Adelanto staff’s blatant disregard of federal detention standards created a dangerous environment for immigrant detainees. 

Those held at the facility include asylum seekers, individuals caught up in raids, and others identified by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as eligible for deportation. Some have just crossed the border while others have been in the United States for decades—though many are detained for years as their cases are decided. 

The OIG report instructs ICE and GEO Group, the private prison company that operates the center and houses the 2,000 ICE detainees, to focus on three particular areas for immediate improvement. 

According to the report, OIG is most concerned about: 


Nooses Hanging in Detainee Cells

During OIG’s inspection, officials found braided bed sheets hanging from vents in 15 out of the 20 cells they visited. Both staff and detainees referred to these bed sheets specifically as “nooses.” 

When asked why they were not removing the nooses, several guards said they were “not a high priority”—despite the seven suicide attempts that occurred at the facility in a 10-month span last year. 

One detainee told the inspectors he had witnessed several people try to commit suicide by tying their bed sheets to the vents. “The guards laugh at them and call them ‘suicide failures’ once they are back from medical,” the detainee said. 


Improperly Segregating Detainees

ICE detainees can be removed from the facility’s general population under certain circumstances, like if they commit a serious rule violation or need medical attention. 

Adelanto staff are required to follow these ICE standards for segregation—yet detainees are often removed from general population for no clear reason in a violation of their rights. 

OIG officials noted that every detainee that was removed during their inspection had been inappropriately placed in segregation. These detainees also had their family visitations revoked and were no longer allowed to purchase toiletries from the commissary, neither of which are listed as an available penalty in ICE’s detention standards. 

In other cases, communication assistance was not available as required. Inspectors noted one such instance during their visit, in which a segregated blind man with limited English proficiency was not given documents he could read in braille or understand. Additionally, OIG officials found that no segregated detainees were provided documents translated into their native languages. 


Failure to Provide Adequate and Timely Medical and Dental Care

OIG officials found that staff physicians, nurses, and mental health providers did not perform their required daily one-on-one evaluations with detainees. The report noted that medical staff would often pass by detainees’ cells, stamp their name on detainees’ records that hang outside of cells, and move on without ever stopping to conduct an evaluation. 

Both internal reviews and detainee testimonials also showed that people waited months to see a doctor for persistent health problems and were not given their prescribed medication. 

Additionally, dentists on-site refused to perform basic dental care. According to the center’s logs, no detainees received cleanings or fillings for four years. Many detainees’ teeth would fall out before their appointments—they were either wait-listed for months at a time or dentists would cancel the appointment without warning. 

Some preventative dental equipment, like floss, is only available through the commissary. When asked what detainees should do while waiting for an appointment, one staff dentist suggest that detainees “could use string from their socks to floss if they were dedicated to dental hygiene.” 

OIG officials recommended ICE conduct a thorough investigation of the detention center to ensure the safety, rights, and health of detainees. ICE said it will comply and has scheduled a contractor to conduct an inspection beginning next week. 

These findings by OIG are disturbing. They show the importance of surprise inspections and the need for congressional oversight of ICE. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

http://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a3916-Doctors-Refusing-to-Treat-Immigrant-Detainees.html

Medical Neglect And Abuse Reported At Atlanta Immigration Detention Center

Written by Tory Johnson

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) currently uses hundreds of detention centers throughout the country to hold individuals in immigration proceedings. Many of these facilities have a concerning record, with appalling conditions and treatment of individuals under ICE’s custody. A recent report from Project South and Georgia Detention Watch highlights such issues at the Atlanta City Detention Center (ACDC), which is governed by the city council and mayor . 

The report Inside Atlanta’s Immigrant Cages reflects 18 months of research, interviews, and facility visits. Drawing on first-hand accounts from individuals held at ACDC, the report documents numerous instances of poor conditions, medical neglect, and abuse. While the facility is temporarily not accepting new detainees from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) following a June order from the Atlanta mayor, ACDC is still in operation. 

The report calls for the closure of ACDC , pointing to dozens of accounts with reported violations of detention standards and human rights. Among the serious allegations highlighted in the report are: 

• Improper or limited medical and mental health care; lack of due process.
• An unsanitary environment; rampant use of lockdown and isolation.
• Exploitative labor practices.
• Demeaning or offensive treatment by detention officers.

For example, only five out of the 38 detained immigrants interviewed for the report said they were satisfied with the medical care they received at ACDC. Among the interviewees who reported medical neglect was a man with health complications from diabetes and a surgical infection. According to the report, he sought medical care but had to wait 20 days to even see a nurse. The report describes his experience: 

“…the handle in the accessible shower in his unit at ACDC broke while he was transferring himself out of the wheelchair onto the shower bench. As a result, he fell, hit his head and knee, and re-opened his surgical injury. Despite his screams of pain, no guards came to his aid, and he had to wait approximately three hours for the supervisor to return before he was taken back to the hospital.” 

Two months later, ACDC medical staff took away his wheelchair though he repeatedly presented the hospital’s order stating his need for crutches. 

The conclusions reached in the report, and the documented experiences of those detained, reveal a stark reality that contradicts the “acceptable” rating the facility received in its annual inspection. The accuracy of these inspections—conducted for ICE by a contracted, private company called the Nakamoto Group—has been heavily scrutinized by federal investigators on multiple occasions. 

For example, an investigation by the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General found major inconsistencies and shortcomings with Nakamoto inspections . The investigation concluded that: 

“…inspections do not fully examine actual conditions or identify all compliance deficiencies… neither the [ICE] inspections nor the onsite monitoring ensure consistent compliance with detention standards.” 

The report strengthens existing evidence revealing persistent allegations of abuses and violations of established standards at detention centers, including disturbing accounts from other detention facilities in Georgia . 

This uptick in alleged offenses is one of the many factors causing some elected officials and leaders to reject proposals for new detention centers or to reconsider existing contracts, which also are a costly burden for taxpayers. Immigration detention—which is civil in nature under the law—should not amount to punishment. 

The concerning conditions at ACDC documented in the report add to mounting evidence of problems at detention centers. Hopefully elected officials and leaders at all levels of government will take this research seriously and make decisions regarding detention that truly reflect the vision and values of our communities and nation. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com

http://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a3888-Medical-Neglect-And-Abuse-in-Immigration-Detention-Center.html

Nationwide Protests: ¿Pro-Immigrant or Anti-Trump?

By Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers, Popular Resistance. 

Over the past weeks, there has been a series of major protests against the mistreatment of immigrants. Hundreds were arrested after blocking DC streets and sitting-in at a Senate office building. Two weeks ago, there were #FamiliesTogether rallies across the United States that forced Trump to end child separation and return to the Obama-era policy of incarcerating immigrant families . People are taking action for immigrant rights and protesting the separation of children from their families as well as the indefinite detention of immigrant families. 

Protesters are holding policymakers personally accountable. This includes protests against Homeland Security director, Kirstjen Nielsen, outside her home playing tapes of immigrant children as well as in a restaurant . The White House staffer, Stephen Miller, who is behind many of Trump’s most racist policies was also protested at a Mexican restaurant and outside his condo in Washington, DC. Popular Resistance believes in holding individuals accountable with carefully planned protests as an essential activist tool. 

The occupation of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) field offices by mothers and children , holding that agency specifically responsible for abusive law enforcement practices, and the burgeoning #OcccupyICE protests, beginning in Portland , are putting pressure on ICE. Microsoft workers called for Microsoft to cancel contracts with ICE . And, peoplemarched on tent city prison camps where children and immigrant families are being held. These build on efforts in court to hold ICE accountable . 

Many cities have chosen to be sanctuary cities by refusing to use their law enforcement to do the work of ICE. Cities that welcome immigrants and have non-discrimination policies have fewer deportations and less insecurity. This is also having the result of making those cities safer in general because immigrants have less fear of reporting crimes. 

While sanctuary and humane treatment of immigrants bring security, raids on immigrants leave misery and broken communities . Here is one account of the terror and hardship caused by an ICE raid on a business last month in Ohio. And the issue of racist and violent policing is still a problem because some cities make a distinction between protecting “law-abiding” immigrants versus those who break a law, as determined by racist police. 

There are divisions over immigration within the enforcement community. In March, an ICE spokesperson resigned rather than continue to put out false information about immigrants. This week, top leaders of Homeland Security enforcement wrote a letter that was made public claiming ICE is making their job of protecting the country from real threats more difficult. Calls for abolition of ICE are now being made by activists and the list of Democrats calling for the abolition of ICE is rapidly growing. 

Are The Protests Pro-Immigrant or Anti-Trump? 

The protests against immigration policies in the Trump-era are different than protests against abusive immigration policies in the Obama-era . There were mass protests against Obama’s immigration policies, which led to deportations at levels that Trump has still not approached, but in the Obama-era, the protests were organized and led primarily by immigrants. In the Trump era, there are protests by immigrants , especially around protecting the Dreamers , but they are also being organized by non-immigrant protesters with a focus against President Trump. These protests began almost immediately with the election of Trump and focused on his policies of stopping immigration at airports, Trump’s Muslim ban . 

The protests remind us of the immense anti-war protests during the George W. Bush presidency, which turned out in hindsight to be more anti-Bush than anti-war as they dissipated when President Obama was elected. The Bush wars continued under Obama, as did coups and other efforts to reverse the pink tide in Latin America. President Obama expanded militarism using robotic-drone warfare, new military troops and bases throughout Africa and mass destruction and slaughter in Libya, yet there were no mass anti-war protests against him as were seen in the Bush era. 

Democratic Party-aligned groups used the anti-war sentiment to stir up their voter base in opposition to President Bush and the Republicans, but were noticeably silent during the Obama administration in order to protect the Democrats. Is immigration being used similarly as an issue to elect Democrats? It appears to be the case. 

Democratic Party-aligned groups like MoveOn and the Women’s March have led some of the organizing efforts. MoveOn reported on the mass protests yesterday, writing in an email: 

While abuse of immigrant families and their children are important reasons to protest, it is critical to be non-partisan or the pro-immigrant movement risks going the way of the anti-war movement, which is still struggling to rebuild. If the protests are framed as anti-Trump, then voters may conclude that electing Democrats will solve the problem. Both major political parties have failed immigrants in the US. We need to build national consensus for pro-immigrant policies that hold whomever is in power accountable. 

Facing the Roots of Abusive Immigration Policies: Racism and Profit

The connection between immigration policies and racism and profit-seeking is being exposed. Stirring up racist hatred against immigrants benefits the ruling elites by keeping people focused on fighting each other while the rich get richer. The federal government has spent $4 billion since the start of 2017 fiscal year on contracts and grants for private prisons, security firms, the tech industry and child “protective” agencies and non-profits, as well as the budgets of federal agencies including Homeland Security, ICE and the US military, which is building prison camps for 120,000 immigrants . Abusing immigrants means high profits for some and plays on the divide-and-rule racism politicians use to control people. 

The broader context is that today’s immigration policies of separating and mistreating families have deep roots . The colonizing founding of the United States treated imported African slaves in brutal ways, including family separation. There has been a similar mistreatment of Indigenous peoples, separating families and putting children into brainwashing, abusive boarding schools. And, racist-based mass incarceration results in fathers and mothers being removed from their families and communities, particularly for black and brown people. 

The duopoly parties ignore the root causes of mass migration , which are due in large part to US economic policies including the injustice of corporate trade agreements on behalf of transnational corporations that abuse people and steal resources throughout the world, as well as US empire policies of militarism, regime change , and imperialism. We wrote two weeks ago about how to protect the human rights of immigrants, the US must end the policies that drive migration . 

The United States Needs A Pro-Immigration Policy To Correct Abusive Treatment of Immigrants

The beginnings of a pro-immigration policy in the United States is developing. Indeed, that word “pro-immigration” needs to become part of the political dialogue. We heard the call for a pro-immigrant policy at the Maryland State Green Party meeting this weekend. It was a phrase we had not heard in the political dialogue, but we are pleased to see it brought out into the open. 

A critical area of information that has been suppressed is the positive impact of immigration on the economy. Research showsthat the presence of immigrant workers has a small positive impact for US-born workers. Immigrants tend to work in different sectors or hold different jobs within the same sector than US-born workers. They also make significant contributions through taxes. Mapping shows how immigration has helped build the economy across the United States . 

The US needs to recognize the positive impacts of policies that protect the human rights of people to move across borders. Research published this week shows that free movement of people could expand the global economy by $78 trillion . 

It is time to end the failed policies of abusive immigration policy, militarized law enforcement and a militarized border and build a positive approach to immigration that protects human rights and builds the economy from the foundation up by using the best of each person who comes to the United States or who already live here. 

If the $4 billion spent on abusive immigration enforcement in the last year had been used to build the foundation of the US economy with a positive approach to immigration, we would all be better off. A positive immigration policy will increase security and build the economy for all people. 

 

Source: Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers, Popular Resistance  

http://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a3839-Pro-Immigrant-or-Anti-Trump.html

What Happens When Migrant Children Are Taken Into U.S. Custody?

Written by Joshua Breisblatt 

The glut of stories surfacing about family separation and the increasing number of migrant children being taken into U.S. custody is deeply concerning. In the past, children detained in shelters had arrived at the border without an adult. Now, however, the U.S. government is making children unaccompanied by intentionally separating them from their parents upon arrival.

Presumably the same policies, procedures, and security checks U.S. officials follow when taking custody of unaccompanied children will apply to the children they take away from parents, who are being criminally prosecuted and detained separately. However, these policies and procedures are about to be put to the test. 

The Trump administration’s new family separation policy has already resulted in 658 children being separated from their parents in just a 13-day span in May. This increase in family separations means more children in the government’s custody for whom they must find a new home. 

Currently when migrant children arrive at the U.S. border unaccompanied they are placed in the care and custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), a part of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Currently, ORR has a network of approximately 100 shelters in 14 states around the United States. 

The government then works to identify parents, other family members, or guardians to sponsor and care for the child while their immigration proceeding continues—proceedings they often face alone with no right to government-appointed legal representation. 

When an appropriate sponsor cannot be located, the child may be placed in foster care. 

An additional wrinkle comes as Immigration and Customs Enforcement proposes stricter vetting around the immigration status of sponsors, making it perilous for undocumented parents or other family members to come forward to take custody of a child. 

There is already a rigorous screening process for sponsors, including a criminal background check and sex offender registry check. Additionally, if the sponsor is not a parent or legal guardian, additional background checks are required. 

In 2016, ORR began making phone calls 30 days after placing an unaccompanied child with a parent or other sponsor. Although not required by law or regulation, HHS chose to take this step to follow up on the success of the placement. When sponsors did not answer the calls, however, it was misreported that HHS “lost” almost 1,500 children in 2017. It is quite possible that these families were limiting their contact with the U.S. government, but complying with requirements to check in with ICE or the immigration court. 

In the coming weeks and months, it will be important for Congress and the public to monitor how children in ORR are treated as the number of families separated at the border continues to rise. This self-inflicted crisis by the administration cannot be an excuse for the United States to not meet its obligations to these children. 

 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

http://inmigracionyvisas.com/a3813-migrant-children-taken-into-custody-in-US.html 

Family Unity Is Threatened By This New Immigration Enforcement Policy

Written by Tory Johnson 

In a directive dated Aug. 29, 2017, which U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement only posted publicly this week, the government significantly weakened safeguards for the rights of parents during the course of immigration enforcement. 

The release of the policy change comes amid growing concern that the Trump administration is increasing the separation of families as part of its immigration enforcement agenda. Without the specific guidance for exercising discretion, this directive has the potential to split up more families—increasing the number of children hurt by immigration enforcement. 

The “Detention and Removal of Alien Parents or Legal Guardians” directive replaces the agency’s previous policy, “Facilitating Parental Interests in the Course of Civil Immigration Enforcement Activities.” That policy—also known as the Parental Interests Directive—had been in effect since August 2013. 

While the 2013 policy was by no means perfect, the explicit emphasis and overall intent was critical: minimize the unintended consequences of immigration enforcement on parental rights and child well-being. 

The Trump administration’s new directive significantly diminishes mechanisms previously implemented to protect the parental rights of individuals in immigration proceedings. Significantly, it eliminates the 2013 guidance for applying prosecutorial discretion when a case involves children. 

The new directive includes the following changes: 

• Eliminates prior guidance for immigration officials to take into account an individual’s role as a parent, legal guardian, and/or a primary caretaker of a minor child when deciding whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion in a case.
• Eliminates guidance for ICE to facilitate a parent’s temporary return to the United States in order to participate in court proceedings affecting their parental rights.
• Does not specify that, should a parent be detained, initial detention should be as close as practically possible to the minor child(ren).
• Instructs ICE agents to generally accommodate a parent or legal guardian’s efforts to make care arrangements for their minor U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident child(ren), rather than immediately calling child protective services as instructed in the 2007 memorandum “Juveniles Encountered During Fugitive Operations.”
• Eliminates training instructions, requirements, and compliance mechanisms related to parental rights and interests.

Although some language remains the same—such as discouraging the transfer of a detained parent to a different ICE Field Office region—the intent of the new directive stands in stark contrast to the superseded Parental Interests Directive. 

The 2013 directive instructed ICE agents to ensure that immigration enforcement activities do not “unnecessarily disrupt the parental rights” of parents or legal guardians of minor children. The language in the new directive is considerably weaker: “ICE personnel should remain cognizant of the impact enforcement actions may have on a lawful permanent resident or U.S. citizen minor child(ren).” 

From policies themselves to the way they are implemented, the United States should reflect its values and keep families together. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

http://inmigracionyvisas.com/a3791-Family-Unity-Is-Threatened-By-This-New-Immigration.html

Immigration and Customs Enforcement Regularly Detains Children for Months at a Time

 

Written by Walter Ewing 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is notoriously tight-lipped when it comes to their internal operations. The agency rarely discloses basic details about where their immigration detention centers are located, how many people are detained, or what the cost is to keep these facilities operational. As one of the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration enforcement arms, this lack of transparency often makes it difficult to hold the agency accountable on their detention and treatment of immigrants.

Yet in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, ICE has done something it rarely does: publicly release information about how it operates. The information was handed over to the Immigrant Legal Resource Center—which made the FOIA request—and has been analyzed by the National Immigrant Justice Center. 

The data provides a revealing snapshot of the immigrant-detention business in the United States: 


Immigrant Detention Centers by the Numbers

Immigrants are detained in over 1,000 facilities that include not only Bureau of Prisons facilities, but also county jails, hospitals, and even hotels. For instance, thousands of people—including children—have been booked into the Quality Suites San Diego since 2016. The average daily number of detainees at the hotel in 2017 was 22 people, all of whom were classified as “non-criminal” with “no ICE threat level.” 

Within these facilities, a record 39,322 people are being held daily in 2018. This is the second year in a row that ICE has surpassed its previously record-setting detainee population. 


ICE Regularly Detains Children, Adults Classified as “Non-Criminal” 

Children are frequently detained, sometimes for months at a time. Often, they are held not in Office of Refugee Resettlement children’s shelters or even family detention centers—they are housed in juvenile jails under contracts with ICE. At the three facilities where children are held for more than 72 hours, length of detention ranges from 100 to 240 days. 

On average, 51 percent of the daily detained population is classified as “non-criminal”—and 51 percent were also classified as “no threat.” Only 23 percent qualified as Level 1 threats, which encompasses a mix of nonviolent offenses and serious crimes. 


Most Detainees Are Held in Privately Operated Prisons

Private prisons dominate the immigration-detention industry. Roughly 71 percent of the daily detained population was held in private prisons owned by companies such as Core Civic (formerly known as the Corrections Corporation of America). 

Many of these contracts with private, for-profit prison companies were made between local governments and the federal government. As of 2017, more than 15,000 people were held daily in private prisons or jails throughout the country. 


ICE’s Detention Standards Are Unclear

ICE has three different sets of standards governing the detention of adults, yet only 65 percent of the agency’s adult detention facilities are contractually bound to observe any of them. 

Some detention facilities make cryptic reference to abiding by “minimum service standards” or “local standards.” Perhaps this is on account of a 2014 Government Accountability Office report, which found ICE sometimes obtains a facility’s agreement to be inspected using a newer set of standards without actually incorporating the new standards into the contract. 

ICE claims that it inspects all facilities under one of its three sets of standards, regardless of the contract. Yet some facilities have passed inspection despite the deaths of multiple detainees, including some from medical neglect. 

The fact that so much prodding was necessary for ICE to release even this much information about its operations is an indication of the degree to which the agency lacks transparency or accountability. ICE officers—like their immigration-enforcement counterparts at U.S. Customs and Border Protection—are accustomed to acting behind a veil of secrecy. As this new disturbing information reveals, we must continue to push past that veil and hold ICE accountable for what happens within their detention centers.

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

http://inmigracionyvisas.com/a3781-Immigration-and-Customs-Enforcement-Regularly-Detains-Children.html