SPICER IS, SOME ARE SPATS THAT REVEAL SOMETHING LARGER AS U.S.
FOREIGN POLICY CAN TURN ON
TRUMP’S FRENEMY ISSUES.
OUR TOP STORY TONIGHT IS ABOUT
THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S
ACTIONS THAT ARE SOME HISTORY
REACHING EXTREME DEGREES.
SO IF YOU HEARD MUCH ABOUT THIS
TOP STORY TONIGHT, NOTE DONALD
TRUMP ISN’T TWEETING MUCH ABOUT
IT, IT DOESN’T INVOLVE TROLLING
OR REALITY SHOWS.
IT IS ABOUT A PRESIDENT SEIZING
NEW POWERS TO DETAIN PEOPLE
INDEFINITELY.
INDEFINITELY. LET ME REPEAT.
INDEFINITE DETENTION.
INDEFINITE DETENTION. THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, MOST DEM
CREATIONS SEVERELY LIMIT THE
GOVERNMENT’S POWER TO DETAIN
PEOPLE, PEOPLE NOT JUST ADULTS,
NOT JUST LEGAL RESIDENTS BUT ALL
PEOPLE BECAUSE PROTECTIONS FOR
HUMAN RIGHTS APPLY TO ALL
HUMANS.
HUMANS. KEEP THAT IN MIND AS YOU TAKE IN
THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S NEW
FEDERAL RULE SEIZING DETENTION
POWERS ATTEMPTING TO ABOLISH THE
CURRENT COURT APPROVED LIMIT HOW
LONG MIGRANT FAMILIES ARE
DETAINED.
DETAINED. TRUMP CLAIMING THE POWER TO HOLD
IT FOR AS LONG AS THEIR CASES TO
GET DECIDED.
GET DECIDED. SOME OFFICIALS SAY THAT COULD BE
MONTHS BUT THERE’S NO FORMAL
LIMIT.
LIMIT. NO LIMIT MEANS NO LIMIT.
INDEFINITE.
INDEFINITE. SOME PEOPLE COULD BE RELEASED
BEFORE 20 DAYS ARE UP, OTHERS
MIGHT NOT BE RELEASED FOR MONTHS
OR YEARS.
OR YEARS. TRUMP’S OWN OFFICIALS ARE
STRUGGLING TO DEFEND THIS TODAY.
>> SO THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS
INDEFINITE DETENTION.
INDEFINITE DETENTION. >> WHAT WOULD THE MAXIMUM BE?
>> THERE IS NO MAXIMUM.
THAT IS WHAT’S REQUIRED COMPLETE
THE CASE.
THE CASE. THESE INDIVIDUALS.
THESE INDIVIDUALS. >> THERE’S NO.
>> IT’S IMPORTANT.
>> THERE’S NO MAXIMUM EQUALS
INDEFINITELY.
INDEFINITELY. >> NO, IT DOES NOT.
>> THAT’S A HUGE DEAL.
IT HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS BUT THE
FORMAL RULE IS NOW BEING
RELEASED IN THESE WANING DAYS OF
SUMMER.
SUMMER. AFTER MONTHS OF IMMIGRATION
CONTROVERSIES.
CONTROVERSIES. SO WHAT DO YOU NEED TO KNOW?
FIRST, THIS IS IS AN ATTEMPTED
POWER GRAB BUT TRUMP DOESN’T GET
THE LAST WORD BECAUSE THIS WOULD
CHANGE AGREEMENT THE PRESIDENTS
IN BOTH PARTIES HAVE FOLLOWED.
A JUDGE MUST STILL APPROVE THE
PLAN.
PLAN. THE AGREEMENT IT WOULD ALTER IS
FROM THE FLORES AGREEMENT.
WHY IS THAT THAT AGREEMENT?
HERE’S THE STORY THAT PREDATES
TRUMP.
TRUMP. MANY PRESIDENTS IN BOTH PARTIES
HAVE BEEN REINED IN BY THE
COURTS OVER MISTREATING MIGRANTS
AND TRYING TO LEAN TOWARDS
INDEFINITE DETENTION WHEN IT
HAPPENS.
HAPPENS. BACK IN THE 1980s, MIGRANT KIDS
FLEEING VIOLENCE WERE KEPT IN
THE ATROCIOUS CONDITIONS CAN
HELD BEHIND A BARRICADE OF RAZOR
WIRE SURROUND AGOLD MOTEL IN BAS
PASADENA, LOCKED IN OVERCROWDED
ROOMS, CHILDREN AND ADULTS
JAMMED TOGETHER.
JAMMED TOGETHER. "THE NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTING
THOSE KIDS DIDN’T GET
RECREATION, VISITS WITH
RELATIVES AND ENDURED BODY
CAVITY SEARCHES.
CAVITY SEARCHES. TFDS TOOK JUDGES REBUKING THE
ADMINISTRATION TO STOP THE
PROBLEM.
PROBLEM. WE DUG UP HOW THAT YOU LAWSUIT
FROM THAT THE COURT BATTLE WAS
REPORTED AT THE TIME.
>> 14-YEAR-OLD ALMA HAS BEEN HE
WOULD HELD IN THIS DETENTION
CENTER FOR A MONTH AND A HALF
SINCE SHE WAS CAUGHT TRYING TO
ENTER THE COUNTRY.
UNDER IMMIGRATION AND
NATURALIZATION SERVICE POLICY,
SHE CAN BE RELEASED ONLY TO A
PARENT.
PARENT. >> Translator: BUT HER MOTHER IS
AFRAID TO PICK HER UP FOR FEAR
THEY WILL BOTH BE DEPORTED.
LAWYERS FROM THE CENTERS FOR
YOUTH LAW AND IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS
CHARGE THE CHILDREN ARE BEING
USED AS BAIT TO CATCH PARENTS.
THEY FILED A LAWSUIT CHALLENGING
THE POLICY AND THE CONDITIONS
UNDER WHICH YOUNGSTERS ARE HELD.
>> THAT WAS A HUGE DEAL.
THEY WON A PART OF THAT BATTLE,
SETTING THESE RULES ULTIMATELY
FINALIZED BY COURTS IN THE
CLINTON ADMINISTRATION.
CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. THOSE RULES ARE PART OF THE
FRAMEWORK FOR MOST OF THESE
BATTLES TODAY FROM OBAMA’S
HANDLING OF A CENTRAL AMERICAN
MIGRANT SEARCH SO TRUMP’S
CRACKDOWNS.
CRACKDOWNS. .
. THEY CLAIM THAT DOING THAT WAS
SO THEY WOULDN’T BE ACCUSED OF
HOLDING KIDS PAST THE 20-DAY
MARK AND NOW AT A TIME WHEN
STEVEN MILLER CONSOLIDATED MORE
POWER OVER THE ENTIRE
IMMIGRATION SYSTEM, WE SEE THEY
WILL WHOLESALE ATTACK ON THESE
HUMAN RIGHTS RULES.
JUDGES COULD REJECT THIS JUST
LIKE THEY RECENTLY REJECTED THE
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S ATTACK ON
RULES TO PROVIDE TOOTHPASTE AND
SO TO DETAINED KIDS BUT LET’S
LOOK AT THIS ALL TOGETHER.
AS A MATTER OF ETHICS THESE
RULES SET A MINIMUM THRESHOLD
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND DIGNITY.
AS A MATTER OF IDEOLOGY, HONEST
CONSERVATIVES AND CIVIL
LIBERTARIANS SUPPORT THE
PROTECTIONS BOTH AS HUMAN RIGHTS
AND AS A LIMIT ON GOVERNMENT
POWER.
POWER. YOU REMEMBER ALL THE ARGUMENTS
ABOUT STEMMING THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT’S POWER?
GOVERNMENT’S POWER? SOME OF THAT LOOKS EMPTY AS A
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT TRIES TO
SEIZE THESE NEW POWERS OF
INDEFINITE DETENTION.
INDEFINITE DETENTION. ONE MORE THING, IF THIS TERM
RINGS A VAGUE BELL, IF IT SOUNDS
CONCERNING, RECALL THE LAST TIME
THE SUPREME COURT LIMITED THE
GOVERNMENT’S POWER TO HOLD
FOREIGNERS IN INDEFINITE
DETENTION.
DETENTION. IT WAS IN A CASE WHERE THE
ARGUMENTS FOR IT ARE THE
STRONGEST POSSIBLE INDEFINITELY
HOLDING SUSPECTED TERRORISTS AND
ENEMY COMBATANTS AT GUANTANAMO
BAY.
BAY. THERE WERE SOME STRONG SECURITY
ARGUMENTS THERE, SOME OF THOSE
PEOPLE LOOKED TERRIBLE BUT THAT
DIDN’T MEAN A PRESIDENT COULD
OVERRULE CONGRESS AND THE COURTS
TO CLAIM THOSE UNILATERAL
DETECTION POWERS EVEN REGARDING
FOREIGNERS OR SUSPECTED
TERRORISTS.
TERRORISTS. SOME OF THOSE CLAIMS TO
INDEFINITE DETENTION WITHOUT
TRIAL WERE REJECTED BY A
CONSERVATIVE LEANING SUPREME
COURT AND RULED
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. THIS HISTORY IS THE CONTEXT FOR
THIS POWER GRAB TODAY THAT
DONALD TRUMP’S NOT TWEETING
ABOUT.
ABOUT. IT’S THE CONTEXT FROM THE FLORES