EXPOSE

CLOSE

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER, NEW MEXICO

September 2014

ABOUT US
Detention Watch Network (DWN) is a national coalition of organizations and individuals working to expose
and challenge the injustices of the U.S. immigration detention and deportation system and advocate for
profound change that promotes the rights and dignity of all persons. Founded in 1997 in response to the
explosive growth of the immigration detention and deportation system in the United States, DWN is today
the only national network that focuses exclusively on immigration detention and deportation issues and is
known as a critical national advocate for just policies that promote an eventual end to immigration detention. As a member-led network, DWN unites diverse constituencies to advance the civil and human rights
of those impacted by the immigration detention and deportation system through collective advocacy, public
education, communications, and field-and-network-building.
DetentionWatchNetwork.org
HISTORY OF EXPOSE & CLOSE
Expose & Close started in 2012, when DWN coordinated the release of ten reports that detail the acute
and chronic human right violations occurring in immigration detention in the United States today. The
reports were authored by DWN members and allies, including policy advocates, community organizers,
legal service providers, faith groups and individuals personally impacted by detention, who together have
deep experience and understanding of the immigration detention system. In 2013, DWN released Expose
& Close: One Year Later, to review conditions in the original ten reports and shine the light on new facilities
with egregious human rights violations. This year, in light of the alarming expansion of family detention,
DWN has chosen to focus its report on the family detention center in Artesia, New Mexico.
REPORT METHODOLOGY & ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report was developed through stories from women and children detained at the Artesia Family Residential Center, with the aid of their attorneys or advocates who visited the facility. We thank the countless
pro bono attorneys who have traveled to Artesia at their own expense and have shared these stories with
us. Even as DWN staff finalized this report, we continued to receive new allegations of abuse and due
process violations. We have done our best to cover the many problems at Artesia, but this report is by no
means comprehensive.
The primary researchers and writers of this report were Madhuri Grewal and Silky Shah. This report would
not have been possible without the incredible support and feedback from many organizations and individuals. We would especially like to thank: Eunice Lee and Lindsay Nash (ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project),
Carl Takei (ACLU National Prison Project), Vicki Gaubeca and Maria Sanchez (ACLU of New Mexico), Anu
Joshi and Karen Lucas (American Immigration Lawyers Association), Bob Libal (Grassroots Leadership),
Tamara Lange (National Center for Youth Law), Jennifer Chan and Royce Murray (National Immigrant Justice Center), Barbara Hines (University of Texas School of Law,* Immigration Clinic), Danielle Rosché and
Angela Williams (pro bono attorneys at Artesia), and Kathleen Sato (graphic design).
Finally, we express our deep gratitude and appreciation for the community organizations and individuals
in New Mexico and Texas that are working hard to end family detention at Artesia and Karnes and to stop
construction of a massive family detention facility in Dilley, Texas. Those groups include Somos Un Pueblo
Unido, the ACLU of New Mexico, Grassroots Leadership, and Texans United for Families.
*	 For identification purposes only

©2014, Detention Watch Network
All Rights Reserved.

ARTESIA
FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
CENTER

EXPOSE

CLOSE

New Mexico

The new
detention facility
in Artesia is
part of a radical
increase in
the detention
of immigrant
families, which
grew by over
1200 percent
between June
and August
2014 alone.

In the middle of the
desert in Artesia,
New Mexico, the
United States government is locking up
hundreds of migrant women and children
in a makeshift detention facility. These
families have braved the dangerous
journey to the U.S. to seek safety and
protection from violence in their home
countries. In response, our government
has incarcerated them in the Artesia
Family Residential Center (Artesia), a
remote facility, hours away from legal
counsel and social services, under
physically and psychologically harmful
conditions that only further compound the
traumas that they have already endured. Rather
than providing sanctuary to these vulnerable
women and children, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE), a division of the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS), has instituted a de
facto policy of mandatory detention, meaning
there is little possibility of release. The U.S. has
the largest immigrant detention infrastructure
in the world, and in fiscal year 2012 detained

478,000 immigrants, an all-time high. The new
detention facility in Artesia is part of a radical
increase in the detention of immigrant families,
which grew by over 1200 percent between June
and August 2014 alone.
The Obama administration has argued that
detaining women and children seeking asylum
allegedly deters further migration from Central
America, and that their release from detention
would pose an indirect national security concern

Expansion of Family Detention Facilities in 2014
4,000
3,500
3,000
NUMBER OF BEDS

I. INTRODUCTION

Dilley, TX

2,500

Karnes, TX

2,000

Artesia, NM

1,500

Berks, PA

1,000
500
0

1-June

1-July

1-August

Expected by end of 2014

T I ME L I N E

September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

There is clear
evidence that
warehousing
families and
raising children
in prison-like
conditions for
even a limited
period damages
children’s
psychological
and educational
development
and overall
health.

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 2

of opposition against the T. Don Hutto Family
Residential Facility (Hutto), a now infamous
detention center in Texas. The administration
has made it clear that it will continue to rapidly
expand and construct family detention facilities such as Artesia due to the recent influx of
Central American women and children arriving
at the border. These facilities—including one
532-bed facility in Karnes City, Texas and another
2,400-bed facility planned in Dilley, Texas—are
intended to quickly deport Central American
asylum-seekers.
by encouraging more migration. This response
is not only alarming and misguided,1 but runs
contrary to upholding the fundamental right to
due process and international human rights
norms, including the preservation of family unity
and child welfare2 and the prohibition on the
use of detention solely as a deterrent to future
asylum seekers.3
ICE first began detaining women and children
at the Artesia facility, a hastily converted former
Border Patrol training center, on June 27, 2014.
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were
not allowed to enter the facility until almost a
month later to assess and document conditions.
By then, three planes of families had already
been sent back to their home countries, the same
ones they fled in fear for their lives. Detention
Watch Network (DWN) was one of over 20
NGOs that visited Artesia in the
month after it opened. During the
tour, it was quickly evident that
the government was not meeting
basic legal obligations to protect
asylum-seekers. Moreover, the
isolation of Artesia—which is
approximately 200 miles from
the nearest major city—seriously
impairs access to legal counsel and
makes oversight and accountability
nearly impossible. Consequently,
among attorneys and community
groups Artesia has become known
as a “deportation mill.”4

Since 2012, Detention Watch Network has
released a series of reports entitled “Expose
and Close” that documented pervasive abuse
and inhumane conditions at some of the worst

...among attorneys and
community groups Artesia
has become known as a
“deportation mill.”
immigration detention facilities in the country
and called for their closure.5 Since then, little
has changed as ICE continues to assert that the
facilities highlighted in the reports are in compliance with applicable standards. Drawing upon
interviews with attorneys and advocates who
have visited the facility, this report demonstrates

What is particularly disconcerting
about Artesia is that it has resurrected the troubling practice of
family detention, which the Obama
administration largely ended in
2009 after a sustained campaign
September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 3

that Artesia is, in important respects, just as bad,
if not worse, than many of the jails highlighted
in the previous “Expose and Close” reports.
But even the best detention center is no place
for children and families. There is clear evidence
that warehousing families and raising children in
prison-like conditions for even a limited period
damages children’s psychological and educational development and overall health.6 Furthermore, the United Nations has condemned the

II. ARTESIA AT A GLANCE

uu Location: 1300

W. Richey Ave.,
Artesia, New
Mexico. The ICE
family detention
trailers are located on the 94,000 plus
square foot Federal Law Enforcement
Training Center (FLETC). The facility
was built to train Customs and Border
Protection officers and other federal law
enforcement agents.

The isolation
of Artesia,
which is
approximately
200 miles
from the
nearest major
city...makes
oversight and
accountability
nearly
impossible.

practice of holding children in detention, stating
that the “detention of children on the sole basis
of their migration status or that of their parents
is a violation of children’s rights, is never in their
best interests and is not justifiable.”7
DWN calls on the Obama administration to
close Artesia, stop the sudden and reckless
expansion of immigration detention, and halt
the deportations of refugee families arriving from
Central America.

uu Date opened: June 27, 2014
uu Average age of a child incarcerated at
Artesia: 6 years old8

uu Nearest ICE Field Office: El Paso, TX
uu Capacity: 672 detention beds
uu Cost of family detention: $266 per
person, per day9

New
Mexico
Texas

September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 4

uu Standards: The detention of women

and children is governed by ICE’s Family
Residential Standards10 and the 1997
settlement in Flores v. Reno (Flores
settlement).11

The Flores settlement establishes nationwide
policy for the treatment of children in federal
immigration custody. It requires that all children
be released from government custody “without unnecessary delay.” The only exception is
for safety or ensuring court appearances. The
Flores settlement requires that if a child must
be held in government custody, the detention
must be in a state licensed facility that meets
basic child welfare-based standards.12 The two

III. CONCERNS

Pro bono
attorneys
at Artesia
report that the
government
is failing in
its obligation
to provide
asylumseekers with
the right to
pursue relief
and fair
hearings.

family detention centers opened this summer,
Karnes and Artesia, fail to meet the standards
for licensed facilities, including education in
a structured classroom setting from Monday
through Friday; appropriate routine medical and
dental care; group and individual counseling
sessions each week; and recreation and social
orientation programs.
ICE family detention standards, like all ICE immigration detention standards, are not codified,
meaning the standards do not have the force of
law. Moreover, family detention facilities, like all
ICE detention facilities, are subject to minimal
independent oversight.

BARRIERS
TO LEGAL ACCESS
AND SOCIAL
ISOLATION
Artesia is extremely isolated from lawyers and
community groups that could provide important
oversight, accountability mechanisms, and
critical legal counseling. Pro bono attorneys
at Artesia report that the government is failing
in its obligation to provide asylum-seekers
with the right to pursue relief and fair hearings.
Nearly all of these attorneys have traveled long
distances to provide support to those detained
at Artesia, usually at their own expense and
with few resources.
While volunteer attorneys are currently representing some women and children at Artesia,
many have expressed the view that this “fire
brigade” of volunteer attorneys is a stopgap
measure that is unsustainable given the remote
location of the facility. Volunteer attorneys also
report that they cannot fully meet the current
demand or needs of individuals being detained
at Artesia, whose asylum cases often require
complex fact investigation and legal analysis.
In addition, attorneys have also repeatedly
expressed frustration at the lack of private space
for in-person attorney-client meetings. There
are only four private cubicles that were recently
erected for attorneys to meet with their clients.
These cubicles are not nearly enough to accom-

modate the number of meetings happening.
Attorneys have described sitting cross-legged
on the floor with clients in a large room, just a
few feet from other attorney-client meetings.
Although Artesia opened on June 27, a formal
Legal Orientation Program (LOP)—which provides basic know-your-rights presentations to
detained individuals but does not substitute for
legal counsel—did not begin until July 18. Consequently, for three weeks, countless women and
children were deported without an understanding
of why they were being detained or deported.
When Artesia first opened, detained mothers
reported that a video served as their “orientation.” Once LOP began, providers could not
serve every family due to the lack of dedicated

September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 5

With respect to cell phone use, policies have
changed at least three times since Artesia
opened.

space for their presentations and have been
forced to use the cafeteria space, which they
share with other activities, including meal times
and religious services. During presentations,
women are distracted juggling their children in
a crammed and chaotic room, making it very
difficult to absorb the complicated legal information presented.
Following guidance from the Obama administration, ICE has effectively instituted a policy of
mandatory detention for women and children
asylum seekers at Artesia, even after they have
passed a screening—known as a credible fear
interview—that establishes they may qualify for
asylum. At Artesia, ICE categorically denies bond
to these women, as well as opposes release
whenever mothers and children request bond
from an immigration judge, despite the agency’s
own assertion that “continued detention” after a
favorable credible fear determination is generally
not “in the public interest.”13 By denying bond,
ICE forcibly incarcerates families and adds yet
another major hurdle to legal access, making it
easier for the agency to quickly deport women
and children refugees.

INTERFERENCE WITH TELEPHONE
COMMUNICATIONS
At Artesia, women and children are not only
held in isolation, but are also severely restricted
from communicating with the outside world.
Policies regarding phone use are inconsistent
and punitive. Women have consistently reported
retaliation by ICE officers that involves the use of
limiting or completely restricting phone access.

Landlines were not installed when the facility first
opened. Instead, ICE officers carried 25 Blackberry cell phones to be used by more than 640
detained individuals. To make a call, a detained
mother had to find an officer with a cell phone,
learn how to use the device, and make the call
in the presence of an ICE officer. After over six
weeks of this convoluted system, ICE replaced
the Blackberry devices with approximately 40
flip phones, which could be checked out with
identification. Calls were limited to one or two
calls per day and cut off after arbitrary time
limits, ranging from mere minutes to 20 minutes.
Less than one week before the release of this
report, DWN learned that ICE had changed
the cell phone policy to emergency use only. It

One attorney stated that
women who cannot afford
the landlines are “at the
mercy of the officials either
granting or denying them
access to the ‘emergency’
cell phones.”
remains unclear how an emergency is defined;
one attorney stated that it seems “subjective
and at the discretion of the ICE official asked.”
To have access to a cell phone, women are
required to submit a written request—including
one woman who needed to reach her consulate
to obtain important documents—and often wait
several days for the request to be processed.
Once permitted to make an “emergency” call,
individuals are limited to a few minutes.
ICE has also recently installed landlines similar to
those used at other facilities. However, families
must prepay for minutes at exorbitant rates to
make phone calls.14 One attorney stated that
women who cannot afford the landlines are
“at the mercy of the officials either granting or
denying them access to the ‘emergency’ cell
phones.” In addition, all calls made from land-

September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 6

lines are monitored and recorded. Confidential
and unfettered access to phone calls is critical
for those who wish to speak with an attorney or
report concerns or abuse at the facility, making
the lack of privacy particularly alarming.

A BROKEN ASYLUM PROCESS
Women continue to be provided with little information about their legal rights and the asylum
process. A volunteer attorney reported that
every woman she met with had a legitimate
claim to asylum under U.S. law and a majority
of the women had been sexually abused or
physically assaulted in their home countries.
Yet some of the determinations made by asylum
officers clearly did not explore the nature of this
violence and telephonic interpretation increased
the women’s difficulty in communicating trauma
and persecution. Many women did not disclose
rape or other critical details to asylum officers or
immigration judges because they were unaware
that the proceedings were confidential.
Lack of childcare continues to be a major problem at the facility and it often impairs immigrant
mothers’ ability to clearly and fully describe
the persecution they faced in their home countries. During attorney consultations, interviews
with asylum officers, and in court hearings via
video-teleconference, mothers were forced to
recount sexual trauma and violence in front of
their children.

Women have also been forced to participate in
credible fear interviews and immigration hearings
with their children due to requirements by ICE
and the Executive Office for Immigration Review
(EOIR) that the family members be present and
remain together. Consequently, many women
feel hesitant or fail to disclose death threats
against their children or fears of violence and
persecution because they do not want to frighten
them. Unfortunately, this hesitation can make
or break an asylum case, in which credibility
is critical. Recently, ICE has started to provide
childcare staffed by ICE officers, but only for
interviews with asylum officers; children are still
required to attend immigration court proceedings
with their mothers.

T. DON HUTTO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FACILITY
The Obama administration is all-too familiar with the serious consequences of
family detention. In 2006, ICE began detaining families at the T. Don Hutto Family
Residential Facility (Hutto), a former medium-security prison in Taylor, Texas built
by the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), a private prison corporation.
Reports emerged that children as young as eight months wore prison uniforms
and jumpsuits, lived and slept in locked prison cells with open-air toilets, and
families were subject to highly restricted movement and threatened with family
separation as a disciplinary tactic. Children experienced bed-wetting, significant
weight loss, and nightmares as a result of the stress from incarceration. Children
were reportedly only given one hour of education a day when the facility opened.
In 2009, the administration stopped detaining families at Hutto after public
opposition, widespread media reports, and a lawsuit challenging the deplorable
conditions at the facility.

September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

Because
children are
incarcerated
in close
quarters and
under stressful
conditions, their
health is being
compromised.

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 7

On August 22, national immigration and civil
liberties organizations and law firms, including
the American Civil Liberties Union, American
Immigration Council, National Immigration Law
Center, and National Immigration Project of the
National Lawyers Guild, filed a lawsuit to halt
deportations at Artesia. The complaint includes
incidents that have been highlighted in this
report and repeatedly raised with ICE and the
administration since Artesia opened. Concerns
raised in the lawsuit include: virtually no notice
to detained mothers and children of critical
interviews related to their asylum requests; a
policy driven by the administration of “detain
and deport” that is systematically applied to
every family held at Artesia; and intimidation
and coercion of families by immigration officers,
including being screamed at for wanting to see
an attorney.

FAILURE TO MEET BASIC CHILD WELFARE
GUIDELINES
Under the terms of the Flores settlement, children in government custody must be held in a
state licensed facility that comports with basic
principles of child welfare.15 The ICE officers that
manage Artesia have little to no training in child
welfare or social services. It appears that many
officers are cycled in and out of the facility after
a few weeks, and new officers who are unfamiliar
with the facility must be trained each month.

ICE has also failed to provide educational services as set forth in its own guidelines. The ICE
Family Residential Standards states, “All children
residing in an ICE Residential Family Facility who
reach the minimum age required by applicable
state law shall be provided with educational
services and programming appropriate to the
minor’s level of development and communication
skills in a structured classroom setting.” 16 The
standards specify that children in ICE custody
must receive an educational assessment within
three days of their arrival at the facility, and then
be placed in a grade or grade cluster based on
this assessment. The Flores settlement sets forth
similar detailed requirements, even outlining
basic academic areas that ICE must include in
its education program.17
The lack of education is one
of the clearest violations
of the Flores settlement
and ICE’s own standards,
which require educational
instruction Monday through
Friday, on a year-round
schedule in accordance
with applicable state regulations and child welfare
laws. Many schools in New
Mexico, including the Artesia Public School District,18
started the school year by
mid-August. As of the publication of this report—midSeptember 2014—ICE has
not started education for
the children incarcerated
at Artesia.

September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 8

DEFICIENT MEDICAL AND MENTAL
HEALTH CARE
Mothers have repeatedly expressed serious
concerns regarding the health of their children;
nearly every mother we spoke with stated that
when their children were taken to the medical
unit, instead of receiving medication, they are
only told to drink more water. Because children are incarcerated in close quarters and
under stressful conditions, their health is being
compromised. For example, in late July, cases
of chicken pox resulted in a total quarantine
of the facility. Although advocates reported
to ICE headquarters in July that medical care
was deficient, pro bono attorneys continue to
hear repeated concerns from clients detained
at Artesia.
Many of the women and children detained at
Artesia have experienced sexual violence and
assault and other psychosocial trauma before
even arriving at the facility. Advocates report
that children at the facility exhibit suicidal ten-

dencies. Yet, there are no onsite mental health
providers and the mental health services that
exist are only available via video-conferencing.
Children at Artesia are able to speak with a
female psychiatrist while their mothers can only
request to speak with a male psychiatrist, who
also serves as the psychiatrist for the Krome
Detention Center in Miami, Florida. This appears
to be a clear violation of the Flores settlement,
under which children must receive individual
counseling at least once a week and group
counseling sessions at least twice a week.20 At

STORIES OF ABUSE AT ARTESIA 19
Even as this report was in its final stages, DWN continued to receive accounts of
shocking abuse, unnecessary cruelty, and appalling conditions at Artesia. These
are just some of those stories:
•	 A 16-month old baby boy entered Artesia able to walk. He got so sick that he
developed pneumonia and had to be hospitalized. He stopped taking solid
foods and returned to breastfeeding. He is now no longer able to walk.
•	 One woman arrived at the facility with her 6-year-old son, who had a sore on his arm
that ICE believed was an infection. The mother and child were put in isolation for
five days. On the fourth day, the mother began vomiting with an apparent stomach
flu and diarrhea. She pleaded with ICE officers to be escorted to the bathroom.
ICE officers repeatedly told her to wait until the woman was forced to defecate
on herself in front of her terrified child. There was no shower in the room,
leaving the mother to sit there in her soiled clothes for 20 minutes. When
the ICE officers opened the door to the room, they laughed at her and tossed
her a towel. The woman was then forced to walk across the facility covered
in feces, accompanied by her crying child.
•	 A 5-year-old had diarrhea for more than two months and was told repeatedly
to keep drinking water. He was not given antibiotics or other medication.

September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 9

Parents are
stripped of their
role as the head
of household
when ICE
officers control
everything from
discipline to
mealtimes.

Artesia, however, women and children do not
even know when the psychiatrist is available to
meet with them, let alone prearranged counseling sessions.
The institutionalized setting of immigration
detention also breaks down family structures and
parent-child relationships. Parents are stripped
of their role as the head of household when ICE
officers control everything from discipline to
mealtimes. Disciplinary policies are not clearly
outlined for both the officers running the facility and the families that are detained. Watching
their parents’ authority undermined by a complete stranger in uniform permanently impacts
children. Moreover, women we met exhibited
signs of depression and post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD), which is compounded by their
detention and can have a severe impact on their
children’s health and early development.21

MALNUTRITION AND SEVERE WEIGHT LOSS
Not only are children at Artesia failing to receive
adequate healthcare services, they are rapidly
losing weight due to the stress of incarceration.
One attorney shared that her client’s child had
lost nearly ten pounds in less than one month.
Another attorney shared that her client’s child
entered Artesia weighing 24 pounds and had
dropped to approximately 14 pounds. He was

slowly regaining the weight. Yet another stated
that her client’s six-year-old son had lost up to 12
pounds and now “has a face like a skeleton.”22

mother we spoke
“	...every
with is forced to sneak food
under her shirt or in her
pants for her children to
eat later.

”

An attorney at Artesia

One attorney at Artesia reported serious concerns
with the regimented nature of mealtimes and food
service, they stated, “every mother we spoke
with is forced to sneak food under her shirt or in
her pants for her children to eat later. Because
the only meal that the children enjoy and will eat
in its entirety is breakfast, the mothers are forced
to sneak breakfast food for the children to eat
later. If they don’t, the children won’t eat. If food
is found in their rooms it is thrown out. Rooms
are subject to random searches that happen on
a somewhat regular basis.”23
ICE itself provided conflicting reports regarding
missed meals. When visiting Artesia, advocates
September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

[T ]he use of
mass detention
in order to
“send a
message”
to others who
might come
later is one
of the most
noxious aspects
of the Obama
administration’s
family detention
policy.

IV. CONCLUSION

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 10

were told by ICE officers that individuals who
missed a meal could eat food from a refrigerator
in each housing unit, which only contained
fruit, milk, and juice. In addition, advocates
were informed that families were not allowed
to take meals out of the cafeteria to eat later to

avoid insects and rodents in the housing units.
Yet, in July, ICE assured advocates if families
had to miss a meal, they are always provided
with boxed meals to eat outside of meal times.
However, an attorney at Artesia reported that
ICE’s claim of boxed meals is simply “not true.”24
Photo by Ed Williams

Family detention is
harmful and unnece­
ssary. Locking up
mothers and their
children in order to deter others from migrating
violates American principles of justice and
international law. Indeed, the use of mass
detention in order to “send a message” to others
who might come later is one of the most noxious
aspects of the Obama administration’s family
detention policy. These problems are easy
to fix: close Artesia and all family detention
facilities, and instead divert funds toward
providing refugee support to the families and
children arriving at the border.
In 2009, after years of pressure and lawsuits
against human rights abuses, the Obama
administration did the right thing and ended the

inhumane practice of immigrant family detention
at the Hutto facility. Later it also canceled plans
for new family detention centers. We are alarmed
to see the same administration ignore the painful
lessons of Hutto and instead rapidly construct
family detention beds at an unprecedented
scale and at great cost to taxpayers. This year
we have already seen a jump from under 100
family detention beds to what is projected to
reach 3,800 beds, and the administration has
requested funding for even more.
DWN urgently demands that the Obama administration reverse course: We call on the U.S.
government to halt deportations, close Artesia
and all family detention centers, cancel its plan
for the 2,400-bed family detention facility in
Dilley, Texas, and immediately release refugee
families and children from immigrant detention.

September 2014

EXPOSE & CLOSE	

ARTESIA FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER 11

ENDNOTES
1 	 Research clearly indicates that detention is not an effective deterrent of migrants. International Detention Coalition There are alternatives:
A handbook for preventing unnecessary immigration detention. Melbourne: The International Detention Coalition (2011), p. 11, available
at http://idcoalition.org/cap/handbook/capfindings/.
2	 Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, Mission to the United States of America, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/7/12/Add.2 (Mar. 5,
2008) (“Families with children should not be held in prison-like facilities. All efforts should be made to release families with children from
detention and place them in alternative accommodation suitable for families with children.”); Inter-Am. Comm. Hum. Rts., Report on
Immigration in the United States: Detention and Due Process, para. 368 (“IACHR is concerned that the practice of detaining immigrant
families continues with no extraordinary reasons to justify it.”).
3	 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR), Detention Guidelines, Guidelines 2, 4.1.4 (2012), available at unhcr.
org/505b10ee9.html (“[D]etention for the sole reason that the person is seeking asylum is not lawful under international law); Article 31,
1951 Convention; Article 18(1), European Union Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on Minimum Standards on Procedures
in Member States for Granting and Withdrawing Refugee Status, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4394203c4.html;
Inter-Am. Comm. Hum. Rts., Report on Immigration in the United States: Detention and Due Process, para.104 (2010) (stating that the
“generalized use of detention in the case of asylum-seekers does not comport with the right to personal liberty”).
4	 M.S.P.C. v. Johnson, No. 1:14-cv-01437, Pls. Compl. (D.D.C. filed 22 Aug. 2014), available at https://www aclu.org/sites/default/
files/assets/filed_complaint_1.pdf.
5	 All Expose and Close reports are available at http://www.detentionwatchnetwork.org/ExposeAndClose. ICE has a track record of abuse
inside its detention facilities, which are documented in countless reports. A summary of reports on immigration detention published between
July 2008 to October 2012 is available at http://www.immigrationforum.org/images/uploads/2010/detentionreportsummaries.pdf.
6	 Robjant K, Hassan R, Katona C. “Mental health implications of detaining asylum seekers: systematic review.” The British Journal of
Psychiatry,194: 306-12 (Apr. 2009), available at: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/194/4/306.full; Physicians for Human Rights and
Bellevue/NYU Program for Survivors of Torture, From Persecution to Prison: The Health Consequences of Detention for Asylum Seekers
(2003), available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/PHR_Reports/ persecution-to-prison-US-2003.pdf; Allen S. Keller et al. “Mental
Health of Detained Asylum Seekers.” Lancet 362: 1721-23 (2003) (explaining that “detaining asylum seekers exacerbates symptoms
of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder”).
7	 Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Report of the 2012 Day of General Discussion on: The Rights of All Children in
the Context of International Migration, available at http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/CRC/ Discussions/2012/
DGD2012ReportAndRecommendations.pdf.
8	M.S.P.C. v. Johnson, supra n.3.
9	 Summary of Draft Text of Senate Emergency Supplemental Bill, Senate Committee on Appropriations, 113th Congress, 2nd Session,
July 2014, available at http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news/chairwoman-mikulski-releases-summary-emergencysupplemental-funding-bill.
10	ICE Family Residential Standards, available at https://www.ice.gov/detention-standards/family-residential/.
11	Stipulated Settlement Agreement, Flores v. Reno, Case No CV85-4544-RJK (C.D. Cal. 1996), available at https://www.aclu.org/sites/
default/files/assets/flores_settlement_final_plus_extension_of_settlement011797.pdf, hereinafter Flores settlement.
12	Ibid., Exh. 1.
13	ICE, Parole of Arriving Aliens Found to Have a Credible Fear of Persecution or Torture, 6.2 (Dec. 8, 2009), available at http:// www.ice.
gov/doclib/dro/pdf/11002.1-hd-parole_of_arriving_aliens_found_credible_fear.pdf; see also The Honorable Robert A. Katzmann,
Bench, Bar and Immigrant Representation, 15 Legislation and Public Policy 585, 593 (2012) (reporting results of comprehensive study
which showed that detention was one of the two most important variables determining success in Immigration Court, with representation
being the other variable).
14	Fees range from 10 to 20 cents per minute for domestic and international calls, respectively.
15	Flores settlement, Exh. 1, supra n. 11.
16	ICE Family Residential Standards, Educational Policy, available at https://www.ice.gov/doclib/dro/family-residential/pdf/rs_
educational_policy.pdf
17	Flores settlement, Exh. 1, A.4, supra n. 11.
18	Artesia Public School District calendar, available at http://swmcdn.com/site_0552/ARTESIA_2014_15DistrictCalendar0801141.
pdf (starting school on August 11, 2014); see also Albuquerque Public Schools calendar, available at http://www.aps.edu/schools/
school-calendars/school-calendars#1415school (starting school on August 13, 2014).
19	 From interviews with Artesia volunteer attorneys (with attorney permission): Angela Williams, supra n. 21, and Danielle Rosché, interview
on file with the author (September 2014)
20	 Flores settlement, Exhibit 1, A.6-A.7, supra n. 11.
21	 National Center for Children and Poverty, Reducing Maternal Depression and Its Impact on Young Children (Jan. 2008), available at
http://www.nccp.org/publications/pdf/text_791.pdf.
22	 American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), “Snapshots from Artesia: Interview with Angela Williams.” 0:00-2:46 (Aug. 18, 2014),
available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2ruGvQVvA&list=UUb5Kl7gHJ dchQVBJO9bqiPA
23	 Interview with attorney on file with the author.
24	 Ibid.

September 2014