The U.S. government and the Center for Human Rights and the Human Rights Act (CHRCL) reached the Flores agreement in 1997, after lawyers filed a class action against the U.S. government on behalf of imprisoned immigrant children in 1985. Among the complainants was a 15-year-old girl named Jenny Lisette Flores, who became the boss of the case. Flores had been held for two months in an Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) facility under substandard conditions, where she was housed next to adults and was subject to regular searches. CHRCL said the federal government, along with children of migrants like Flores, had violated its rights to a proper trial. Under the control of the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California, the Clinton administration agreed with CHRCL on establishing rules for the treatment of children in custody. The agreement was to expire 45 days after the release of the federal government`s orders on the implementation of Flores, freeing the detention of federal government minors from judicial supervision. But the federal government has never adopted regulations on this issue and the Flores agreement continues to apply.
That`s the situation. What they are doing is a reference to a judicial transaction called the Flores decision, which took place in 1997. I am very familiar with it because I signed it. And it was a comparison of a long-standing dispute that said that children were being held in as unrestricted a setting as possible and for the shortest possible time in order to be accommodated either by a family member or by another custody situation. The group action ended with a settlement agreement, which established standards for the detention and release of unaccompanied minors, which were placed under the tutelage of the Immigration and Conservation Service (INS) and are now managed by the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Health and Human Services. This year, DORIS Meissner, Commissioner of the INS, signed the Flores transaction contract. The agreement included several major concessions from the government: President Clinton, Meissner and Virtue (including those who supported the agreement at the time) could not predict how Flores would be even more distorted in the years to come. Nevertheless, the Occam razor explains that the simplest answer tends to be the right one. The simplest explanation for the Clinton administration`s action on Flores` signature in 1997 is that she had the same views on asylum laws as activist groups, that they should be more cowardly. The case was filed on July 11, 1985 by the Centre for Human Rights and Constitutional Law (CHRCL) and two other organizations on behalf of minor immigrants, including Jenny Lisette Flores, who had been placed in a male and female adult detention facility after being stopped by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to cross the Mexican-U.S. border illegally.