|
 |
 |
 |
|
 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
Oct. 4, 2007, 1:02AM
By LISA FALKENBERG
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
Link
Maybe it was the international media scrutiny. Maybe it was the 10 federal lawsuits alleging harmful conditions. Perhaps it was the case earlier this year of a guard having sex with a detainee.
Whatever the motivating factor, Williamson County has apparently concluded that helping the federal government detain immigrant parents and children in a converted medium-security prison is a risky business, one to which the county no longer wants a part.
The news at first seemed to signal the end to the saga at the T. Don Hutto Family Residential Facility in Taylor. It seemed the perfect opportunity for federal immigration officials to relocate families to a more humane, homelike environment or increase the use of electronic monitoring and other effective, less-expensive alternatives to detention, as congressional committees have advised.
Immigration officials could finally close the door on a facility that has become a public relations nightmare and a liability to our country's human rights record.
But for now, the door remains open.
Settlement last month
Hutto, a 512-bed facility, is one of two disclosed facilities that house immigrant families from countries other than Mexico accused of being in the country illegally. Hutto was the subject of a settlement last month between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the American Civil Liberties Union.
ACLU lawsuits alleged that children were subjected to prisonlike conditions, psychologically abusive guards and substandard medical care and nutrition; ICE acknowledged no wrongdoing and maintains that Hutto is a humane alternative to separating families awaiting deportation or seeking asylum.
Earlier this week, Williamson County commissioners took steps to end early the county's role in administering the Hutto contract with a private prison company, Corrections Corporation of America, and ICE. Despite some reports that it's a done deal, a vote is expected at the earliest next week. The contract currently is set to expire in 2009.
County officials say the decision has nothing to do with immigration policy. They maintain that it's a liability issue, that they fear being held responsible for accidents, abuse or other incidents in a facility they don't directly oversee.
In May, for example, immigration officials directed the county to produce a corrective action plan in response to the inappropriate sexual contact between a guard and an adult detainee. The county receives a cut for administering the Hutto contract, but doesn't oversee daily operations, so some officials wondered why they were being held responsible in the sex incident.
In the end, it appears, county officials determined it would be more cost-effective to wash their hands of Hutto. But that doesn't mean our federal government will.
Another location?
ICE spokesman Carl Rusnok said Wednesday that the agency plans to continue using family detention and that, in anticipation of the county's decision to cancel ICE's contract, the agency "has been taking necessary steps to secure a contract to operate a family detention facility."
ICE's policy of detaining families isn't the main problem. The policy made some sense when the agency determined after 9/11 that most immigrants weren't showing up for court.
But Rusnok wouldn't say whether ICE would keep the detention operation at Hutto, and just contract directly with the prison company, CCA, or whether the agency is considering another location altogether.
Location is everything when babies, toddlers and school-aged children are involved.
Another location, preferably one without lasers and cell blocks and slits for windows, would be a good start. And now is the time.
Pennsylvania site a model
The population at Hutto has reportedly dwindled in recent months and there are indications that officials are trying to limit the number of asylum seekers sent there. Barbara Hines, an attorney who oversees the University of Texas immigration law clinic, said she believes plans are under way to convert portions of Hutto to house female immigrant detainees without children.
Relocating parents and their children to a more homelike environment would show an effort on ICE's part.
ICE's own facility in Pennsylvania would be a good model. The Berks Family Shelter Care Facility is a former nursing home, "home" being the operative word. It's run by a county, not a prison company used to incarcerating adult criminals.
A report by the Women's Commission for Refugee Women and Children found Berks was far preferable to Hutto, which the organization advised be shut down.
This time, there's no litigation forcing ICE officials to do the right thing by immigrant parents and children. There's only common sense and the closest thing they're going to get to a graceful exit.
lisa.falkenberg@chron.com
