Achieving the Ideals Embodied in the CRC

Today marks the 20th anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the most comprehensive treaty on children’s rights. The convention has been ratified by nearly every country in the world, except for the United States. The convention would fill current gaps in U.S. laws, and provide all children in America with the same robust protections that children in 193 countries are already entitled to.

Watch the Freedom Files video short about the conditions at Hutto on ACLU.tv > >

On August 6, 2009, federal officials announced that the T.Don Hutto Detention Center in Taylor, Texas, would no longer house immigrant families. This marked the end of an almost three-year struggle to vindicate the basic rights of children detained in this facility.

The Hutto facility, a former prison operated by a private adult corrections company, was opened in May 2006 by U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) as part of a move that aimed, in part, to deter child smuggling and keep families together. At Hutto, children of all ages were forced to wear prison uniforms, lacked adequate medical care and educational access, endured threats of separation from their parents from guards and were rarely allowed outdoors.

Not only did such treatment betray established U.S. law, it was also an affront to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). In the spring of 2007, the ACLU, along with a number of cooperating attorneys, filed lawsuits on behalf of 26 detained children charging that ICE was operating the Hutto facility in violation of existing standards governing the treatment of children in immigration custody.

On August 27, 2007, the ACLU won a landmark settlement with ICE that greatly improved conditions at Hutto. While the settlement was a victory, Hutto remained structurally a prison. The ACLU continued to advocate, along with other groups, for ICE to close Hutto and use alternatives to detention for families.

The closure of the Hutto Family Detention Center just a few months ago was a victory, but the struggle is not yet over. One other family detention center remains — the Berks facility in York, Pa. It is imperative that the U.S. end the practice of family detention altogether. No innocent child should be in detention when alternatives exist that would allow the government to meet its law enforcement aims in a much more humane manner. Then and only then will the U.S. be one step closer to achieving the ideals embodied in the CRC.

View comments (15)
Read the Terms of Use

puma shoes

puma shoes online store - Top brand name shoes, enjoy discount price and the best service at http://www.pumaforever.com

Paen

Isn't that just wonderful,America is being saved from toddlers in diapers and
little girls armed with rag dolls.
I just hope that all the good Christian Patriots are very proud.

Vincent A. Sellers

It is incongruent and illogical for the ACLU to support this endeavor of the rights of a child and, on another page, support a woman's right to abortion. The logic of Roe in the Supreme Court is akin to the logic of Taney's Court in supporting the slave owner of Dred Scott. Locke wrote that we have a right to "life, liberty and property". In the Roe decision the Court viewed a private right to "liberty" outweighed the child's right to life. In the Dred Scott decision the Court ruled that a white man's private right to "property" outweighed Dred Scott's right to "liberty".

roald

Mr. Sellers, nice try. There is no child in Roe v. Wade.

Vegas Patriot

roald: The child Mr. Sellers was refering to is the fetus whom Norma McCorvey "Jane Roe" carried and all those fetus' who have no one to speak for them and fight for their rights. A child and a fetus are essentially the same in that they are living humans.

Beholder

I think the only acceptable policy is for the parents of dependent children to be released from detention if they have committed no serious crime and are merely being held because of immigration status.

This is yet another example of the perversities of our national immigration policies.

This is not an apology for illegal immigration, but our laws should enforced wisely and justly, in the interests of protecting the most vulnerable members of our society, the children.

Protecting the weak is the most basic principle of democracy, and our Constitution extends those principles to anyone in our jurisdiction without regard to national origin.

MexTex

I think the most direct answer to all of this is to have amnesty given to everyone in every year! European countries routinely give immigrants amnesty every year why can't Americans do that as well? If we were to taken in 1 billion of people from poor countries to come to this great nation then why not? I do not understand why the worries about having too many people in this country but yet greed and selfishness is so close to their hearts that the same people have NEVER thought about where these items COME FROM! I want an open border policy and that is what I am honest about! I will work to eliminate all borders from the United States so that ALL races can come in as freely as they want without having to worry so much about documentation of who they are! Thanks to the ACLU for giving us aid to the forgotten human beings that comes across the border.

Vegas Patriot

Perhaps those of you who think amnesty is the correct action to take should read the information on this web site (http://www.numbersusa.com/content/issues.html) It may help you better understand the issues against illegal immigration.

Vegas Patriot

Another article online http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=117083. Interesting that this article is under Immigrants' Rights when the persons in this facility haven't yet been deemd as immigrants.

God Bless America!

chuck

The only rights illegal immigrations deserve is deportation. If they are caught in the USA again, put a bullet through their heads.

Pages

Stay Informed