A federal judge has stepped in to stop a deeply controversial Trump administration policy that aimed to detain immigrant children even after they turned 18. This move prevents these young adults from being transferred to adult detention centers—a plan that advocates feared would begin as soon as this past weekend.
On Saturday, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras, based in Washington D.C., issued a temporary restraining order against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The order specifically prohibits ICE from placing unaccompanied immigrant children into adult detention facilities once they reach the age of legal adulthood, according to reports from the Associated Press.
Judge Contreras emphasized that automatically detaining these individuals violates a prior 2021 court order, which clearly forbade such actions. This ruling adds another chapter to the ongoing legal battles surrounding the Trump administration’s highly contentious immigration policies, especially those affecting minors.
But here’s where it gets controversial: just one day before this ruling, The Guardian revealed that the Trump administration planned to offer immigrant children a $2,500 “one-time resettlement support stipend” as an incentive to self-deport voluntarily. This payment was intended to encourage children to leave the U.S. without going through a full legal process.
Murad Awawdeh, president of the New York Immigration Coalition, strongly criticized this approach, stating, “This policy pressures children to abandon their legal claims and return to a life of fear and danger without ever receiving a fair hearing.” He warned that the chaos embedded in this policy would devastate families and communities, and that it was deliberately designed to harm children.
To clarify for those unfamiliar with the system: under federal law, unaccompanied minors are supposed to be housed in facilities managed by the Office of Refugee Resettlement, which operates under the Department of Health and Human Services—not ICE. This distinction is crucial because ICE is responsible for adult detention, while the Office of Refugee Resettlement focuses on child welfare.
Judge Contreras’s 2021 ruling mandated that once these children turn 18, they must be released to the “least restrictive setting available,” assuming they are not a danger to themselves or others and are unlikely to flee. Typically, this means placement with relatives or foster families.
Despite this clear legal directive, attorneys representing immigrant youth have reported receiving alarming notifications that ICE instructed shelters to halt releasing soon-to-be 18-year-olds—even those with approved release plans—and instead prepare to transfer them to adult detention centers, as reported by the AP.
Adding fuel to the fire, the Trump administration faces serious accusations of resurrecting the practice of separating families as a tactic to coerce immigrants and asylum seekers into leaving the U.S. Attorneys and former immigration officials have publicly condemned this approach.
A Guardian investigation uncovered several cases where officials retaliated against immigrants who challenged deportation orders by forcibly separating them from their children. In these instances, children were misclassified as “unaccompanied minors” before being placed in government-run shelters or foster care, raising profound ethical and legal questions.
Earlier this year, it was also reported that ICE officials have been actively conducting nationwide operations to locate unaccompanied immigrant children, with the goal of deporting them or pursuing criminal charges against them or the adult sponsors who are legally sheltering them in the U.S.
Over recent years, the government has tightened screening procedures before releasing children to relatives or sponsors. This process now includes fingerprinting, DNA testing, and home visits, which has significantly extended the average time minors spend in custody.
Data released just last month revealed a striking trend: immigrants without any criminal record now make up the largest group held in U.S. immigration detention, surpassing those who have been charged with crimes. This fact alone raises important questions about the purpose and fairness of current detention policies.
So, what do you think? Is detaining immigrant children past their 18th birthday a necessary security measure, or is it a violation of their rights? And what about offering money to encourage self-deportation—does that cross an ethical line? Share your thoughts and join the conversation below.
