LOS ANGELES — The Trump administration is awaiting a federal appeals court decision on its attempt to end the Flores Settlement Agreement, which governs the detention of migrant children. The Ninth Circuit heard arguments June 2 in Seattle and had issued no decision by Friday, July 24, 2026.
Chief U.S. District Judge Dolly M. Gee is separately considering stronger oversight of federal detention operations. A July 31 hearing in Los Angeles could determine whether independent officials will monitor border facilities and a family detention center in Dilley, Texas.
The proceedings address different legal questions but could reshape the same detention system. The administration wants courts to stop enforcing Flores, while Gee is examining whether federal agencies have followed its requirements.
Appeals court reviews termination bid.
The Justice Department appealed after Gee denied the termination request in August 2025. The case is before Ninth Circuit Judges William A. Fletcher, Marsha S. Berzon and Milan D. Smith Jr.
Government lawyers argue that federal laws, agency rules and detention practices have changed since the settlement took effect in 1997. They say immigration policy should return to the executive branch and Congress rather than remain under long-term judicial supervision.
The administration also says federal agencies now provide protections unavailable when the litigation began. Its argument relies partly on a federal rule allowing courts to end continuing orders when enforcement is no longer equitable.
Lawyers representing migrant children dispute that position. They say the government has not replaced Flores with an equally enforceable system covering detention length, release, medical care, sanitation and facility licensing.
Gee found that the government had not identified new facts or law sufficient to justify ending the settlement. The Ninth Circuit also rejected an earlier effort involving regulations that conflicted with key Flores provisions.
Flores governs detention standards.
The litigation began in 1985 after immigration authorities detained Jenny Lisette Flores, a Salvadoran teenager. The government and lawyers for detained children reached a nationwide settlement 12 years later.
The settlement sets nationwide standards for the detention, placement, and release of immigrant minors. It requires authorities to treat children with dignity and account for their particular vulnerability.
Children must be held in the least restrictive setting suitable for their age and needs. Facilities must provide food, drinking water, toilets, temperature controls, supervision and emergency medical assistance.
Flores also favors prompt release to a parent, relative or suitable custodian when detention is unnecessary. Children who cannot be released generally must be transferred to licensed programs, subject to defined exceptions.
The agreement does not automatically require the release of a detained parent. However, the Ninth Circuit protected accompanied migrant children by ruling in 2016 that Flores covers minors arriving with parents and those arriving alone.
The frequently cited 20-day detention limit developed through later court decisions involving family detention. Flores also governs placement, detention conditions, legal access and procedures for reporting alleged violations.
A 2024 federal decision ended some Flores obligations for children held by the Department of Health and Human Services after new regulations took effect. The agreement remains enforceable for children in Homeland Security custody, including those held by ICE and Customs and Border Protection.
Dilley disputes drive oversight.
The latest compliance dispute centers on the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley. ICE uses the privately operated facility to hold parents and children during immigration proceedings and removal efforts.
ICE has described safe family conditions at Dilley. The agency says children receive medical screenings and have access to education, recreation, outdoor activities, toys and infant-care supplies.
Lawyers for detained families describe different conditions. They have alleged inadequate food, delayed medical treatment, limited legal information, disrupted sleep and prolonged detention.
Those allegations have not been established as findings against every part of the facility. ICE disputes claims that Dilley is unsafe and says its detention standards protect families while immigration cases proceed.
Plaintiffs documented prolonged child detention in filings submitted during early 2026. They alleged that nearly 600 children had recently been detained at Dilley and that many remained in custody beyond 20 days.
The filings also alleged that some children lacked adequate medical or mental health treatment. Those claims remain disputed by the government and have not been resolved through a final judicial finding.
A July submission from the children’s lawyers said 426 minors remained at Dilley longer than 20 days in February. It said 141 exceeded that period in March. The government contests the plaintiffs’ description of the figures and facility operations.
Gee has proposed independent court oversight covering Dilley and selected CBP facilities. The monitor and special master would examine custody time, medical care, food, sanitation, sleep conditions, temperature and notice of legal rights.
The proposed officials could conduct announced and unannounced inspections. They could also review agency documents, interview detained families and verify data used to calculate time in custody.
July 31 hearing approaches
The Ninth Circuit may affirm Gee’s ruling, reverse it or return the case for additional proceedings. A decision for the administration could end Flores or require the district court to reconsider whether some provisions should remain.
If the administration loses, it could ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the dispute. No petition can be filed before the Ninth Circuit issues its decision.
Gee retains authority over Flores while the appeal remains pending. The court scheduled a hearing for July 31 to address the proposed monitor, disputed detention data and recent compliance submissions from ICE and CBP.
No final order appointing the independent officials had been issued by July 24. Flores remains in effect for children held by Homeland Security agencies while the appeals court and district court consider their next rulings.
