In recent months, disturbing testimonies from detained immigrant children have resurfaced, underscoring the grim conditions within U.S. immigration facilities. Among the accounts: a child developed a rash after being denied a change of underwear for four days, another became so distraught he began hitting himself in the head out of despair, and a child with autism and ADHD was denied access to his medication despite his mother’s urgent requests.
“I heard one officer say about us, ‘they smell like sh–,'” one detainee recounted in a federal court filing. “And another officer responded, ‘They are sh–.'”
These reports were gathered by attorneys representing immigrant children detained across the United States between March and June. Their findings, described as reflective of “prison-like” conditions, are at the center of a legal fight over the Trump administration’s attempt to end the Flores Settlement Agreement—a decades-old federal court decree that enshrines basic rights and protections for minors in U.S. immigration custody.
The Department of Justice has petitioned a California federal court to terminate the Flores agreement, arguing that it hampers the administration’s ability to enforce immigration policy and encourages illegal migration. U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee is expected to rule after an August 8 hearing.
In their June filing, immigrant rights attorneys reported that children are being held in unsafe, unsanitary Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facilities—including tents, offices, and airports—for prolonged periods, sometimes weeks. This stands in contrast to CBP’s internal policy, which states detainees should generally not be held for more than 72 hours. The attorneys are not only opposing the request to dissolve the Flores agreement but are also calling for enhanced monitoring of children in federal custody.
“The biggest fear is that without Flores, we will lose a crucial line of transparency and accountability,” said Sergio Perez, executive director of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law.
“Then you have a perfect storm for the abuse of individuals, the violation of their rights, and the kind of treatment that this country doesn’t stand for.”
First enacted in 1997 after a decade-long legal battle, the Flores agreement set minimum detention standards for immigrant children, following the case of Jenny Lisette Flores, a 15-year-old Salvadoran girl detained in the 1980s who was subjected to invasive searches and housed alongside unrelated adult men.
Flores requires that children be housed in facilities with clean water, adequate food, proper clothing and bedding, educational and recreational activities, and access to medical and mental health services. In 2015, Judge Gee ruled that the protections extend to children traveling with their families.
However, amid renewed efforts to dismantle the agreement, both the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—which oversees CBP and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—have declined to comment on current detention conditions or the motivation behind ending Flores. In a May court filing, government lawyers claimed the agreement improperly assigns immigration policy decisions to the judiciary rather than the executive branch. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has stated that Flores has “incentivized illegal immigration” and that the issues it aimed to resolve have been addressed by Congress and federal agencies.
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson defended the current detention practices, stating by email that ICE facilities maintain “the highest standards.”
“They are safe, clean, and hold illegal aliens who are awaiting final removal proceedings,” she added.
But immigration attorneys and human rights researchers challenge that assertion, arguing the root causes of migration lie in violence, poverty, and instability in migrants’ home countries—not in legal safeguards like Flores.
Efforts to limit Flores protections predate the Trump administration. In 2016, President Barack Obama’s administration attempted to exempt accompanied children, citing a surge in arrivals from Central America. In 2019, after separating families at the border, Trump officials proposed regulations to replace Flores with looser standards and eliminate detention limits—but federal courts struck down the plan.
In 2024, the Biden administration requested, and received, permission to remove the Department of Health and Human Services from the Flores decree, citing the incorporation of its protections into internal regulations by the Office of Refugee Resettlement.
Despite these legal developments, reports of unsafe conditions persist. A 2019 court filing described appalling scenes in two Texas detention centers, where over 250 children—many held for weeks—were reportedly filthy and wearing soiled clothing. Media reports confirm that seven children died in federal custody between 2018 and 2019.
In 2023, 8-year-old Anadith Danay Reyes Alvarez died after nine days in CBP custody in Texas. Her parents had submitted documentation detailing her medical conditions, including sickle cell disease and congenital heart disease. Yet, according to her mother, repeated pleas for medical assistance went unanswered. Her family filed a wrongful death claim in May.
Advocates point to chronic overcrowding and delays in medical care as contributing factors in these tragedies. While officials say medical services have since been expanded, systemic concerns remain.
“Very rarely do you have spikes in populations of detained folk that you don’t see a drastic decrease in the quality of their medical care,” said Daniel Hatoum, senior supervising attorney at the Texas Civil Rights Project, one of the organizations representing Anadith’s family.
Reports from court-appointed monitors indicate ongoing issues: inadequate access to healthcare, extreme temperatures, insufficient nutrition, lack of proper clothing, and the inability to dim lights during sleep hours. Terminating the Flores agreement, critics warn, would eliminate independent oversight and place full responsibility for monitoring detention conditions in the hands of the government.
“Our system requires that there be some oversight for government, not just the Department of Homeland Security, but in general,” Hatoum emphasized.
“We know that. So, I do not believe that DHS could police itself.”
After Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency introduced sweeping cuts in early 2017, the Trump administration shuttered several DHS oversight bodies, including the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and the Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman. Though the decision was reversed following a lawsuit, questions remain about the functionality of these offices amid shifting policies and reduced staffing.
Leecia Welch, an attorney with the advocacy group Children’s Rights, stressed that Flores should not be seen through a partisan lens.
“These are not political issues for me,” Welch said.
“How does our country want to treat children? That’s it. It’s very simple. I’m not going to take it easy on any administration where children are being harmed in their care.”
