PERMANENT Injunction Entered, Just Now, By The Able USDC Judge Gee… In Re Flores
September 27, 2019

We have — as of a few moments ago — a permanent injunction against Trump’s “proposed rules” the object of which was to set aside the 1998 Flores settlement, alleging “changed circumstances.”

Trump has failed. Again. His rules may never be enforced. Of course, Sarah Fabian and crew will appeal. And they, along with Trump, will lose — as we’ve long predicted. Full 24 page opinion here — as a PDF file.

Here’s the short order itself (PDF), and the salient portion of the full text, below:

. . . .The blessing or the curse — depending on one’s vantage point — of a binding contract is its certitude. The Flores Agreement is a binding contract and a consent decree. It is a final, binding judgment that was never appealed. It is a creature of the parties’ own contractual agreements and is analyzed as a contract for purposes of enforcement. Defendants cannot simply ignore the dictates of the consent decree merely because they no longer agree with its approach as a matter of policy. The proper procedure for seeking relief from a consent decree is a Rule 60(b) motion by which a party must demonstrate that a change in law or facts renders compliance either illegal, impossible, or inequitable.

Relief may also come from a change in law through Congressional action. Having failed to obtain such relief, Defendants cannot simply impose their will by promulgating regulations that abrogate the consent decree’s most basic tenets. That violates the rule of law. And that this Court cannot permit.

Based on the foregoing, the Court DENIES Defendants’ Motion to Terminate and GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion to Enforce insofar as it seeks an Order declaring that Defendants have failed to terminate the Flores Agreement and enjoining Defendants from implementing the New Regulations. The Court therefore will issue a Permanent Injunction consistent with this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. . . .

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. The Flores Settlement Agreement remains in effect and has not been terminated;

2. Because the regulations, published on August 23, 2019, entitled “Apprehension, Processing, Care, and Custody of Alien Minors and
Unaccompanied Children,” 84 Fed. Reg. 44932–44,535 (“the New Regulations”), fail to implement and are inconsistent with the relevant and substantive terms of the Flores Settlement Agreement, including Paragraphs 9 and 40 of the Agreement, Defendants shall continue to comply with the Flores Settlement Agreement until they publish final regulations in compliance with the Agreement, including Paragraphs 9 and 40; and

3. Defendants are permanently enjoined from applying, implementing, or enforcing the New Regulations.

DATED: September 27, 2019

Now you know. Smoke that, Dotard.

नमस्ते