WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge on Thursday blocked President Donald Trump’s administration from immediately deporting Guatemalan migrant children who came to the U.S. alone back to their home country, the latest step in a court struggle over one of the most sensitive issues in Trump’s hard-line immigration agenda.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly comes after the Republican administration’s Labor Day weekend attempt to remove Guatemalan migrant children who were living in government shelters and foster care.
Trump administration officials stated they were seeking to reunify children with parents who wanted them to return home. However, Judge Kelly noted, “That explanation crumbled like a house of cards about a week later,” asserting that there was no evidence before the Court that the parents of these children sought their return.
Kelly had already put a temporary order in place preventing the removal of Guatemalan children, which was set to expire. Instead, he granted a preliminary injunction extending that temporary protection indefinitely, although the government can appeal.
While Judge Kelly rejected advocates’ request to prevent the removal of children from additional countries, he indicated that any such actions would likely be deemed unlawful.
In August, the administration initiated a late-night operation notifying shelters of its intent to return the children to Guatemala, requiring them to be ready to depart within hours. The government identified a total of 457 children for possible removal, narrowing the list to 327, with 76 children boarded on planes for departure.
Immigration and children’s advocates, alerted to the removal plans, swiftly took legal action to stop the Trump administration from advancing its deportation efforts. They argued that many of these children were fleeing violence and abuse, and the government was bypassing crucial legal protections.
Temporary restraining orders are also in place in separate cases in Arizona and Illinois, highlighting the ongoing importance of the Washington case concerning immigrant children. As this legal battle unfolds, the rights and safety of vulnerable young migrants continue to remain at the center of public and judicial concern.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly comes after the Republican administration’s Labor Day weekend attempt to remove Guatemalan migrant children who were living in government shelters and foster care.
Trump administration officials stated they were seeking to reunify children with parents who wanted them to return home. However, Judge Kelly noted, “That explanation crumbled like a house of cards about a week later,” asserting that there was no evidence before the Court that the parents of these children sought their return.
Kelly had already put a temporary order in place preventing the removal of Guatemalan children, which was set to expire. Instead, he granted a preliminary injunction extending that temporary protection indefinitely, although the government can appeal.
While Judge Kelly rejected advocates’ request to prevent the removal of children from additional countries, he indicated that any such actions would likely be deemed unlawful.
In August, the administration initiated a late-night operation notifying shelters of its intent to return the children to Guatemala, requiring them to be ready to depart within hours. The government identified a total of 457 children for possible removal, narrowing the list to 327, with 76 children boarded on planes for departure.
Immigration and children’s advocates, alerted to the removal plans, swiftly took legal action to stop the Trump administration from advancing its deportation efforts. They argued that many of these children were fleeing violence and abuse, and the government was bypassing crucial legal protections.
Temporary restraining orders are also in place in separate cases in Arizona and Illinois, highlighting the ongoing importance of the Washington case concerning immigrant children. As this legal battle unfolds, the rights and safety of vulnerable young migrants continue to remain at the center of public and judicial concern.
