Thanks. Hi. Im diane eikenberry. Im a senior attorney, and i work with detained children in o. R. Custody in virginia and maryland. I sort of have two questions but theyre related to training and stakeholder relations and sort of two parts for barbara and maria. First maria, i want to thank you so much for the wonderful work that the young center does. Thanks. Ive had the pleasure of working with one of your child advocates out of the office in harlingen. You make a great difference. Im so excited youre opening new offices because we need more of your work. Thanks. But barbara, you mentioned theres expanded training for the Immigration Judges. Can you speak a little bit about that . And also maybe generally about what kind of training, if any, is required for Immigration Judges around issues relating to these unaccompanied minors. So we have done some training with the Immigration Judges, you know. Some of you know because of budgetary issues, weve had to have our conferences on dvd for our judges. We had planned a conference actually this summer, a live inperson conference that we had to postpone in part because of the surge, and we didnt want to take all the judges off the dockets for a week. But we are planning on having a conference at some point where we expect to have a full day of a kids track for for the judges that handle kids cases. And, you know, like marias a frequent appearer at all of those. You know, we really do try and bring in the outside experts, bring in the people who do some of the work more directly with the kids, the stuff that comes before they get to see the judge. So, you know, and we listen well reach out to some of the judges and say what are you interested in knowing more about . You know, we look at whats happening sort of this summer and, you know, have looked at what are things that might be more important . You know, should we have a particular panel on, you know, asylum claims that are really specific to these types of kids so . So we anticipate having a full day just for kids. And i expect, what i understand from the judges ive talked to, i expect its going to be really popular given the fact that we have so many judges now hearing the kids cases. And when we have our training, we record it all. So that, like, if theres a judge who really wants to go to another panel at that time, they can request to see it at another time like on dvd. You know, we understand that training is important. So we are expanding it with respect to dealing with the kids and how to make sure that procedures are appropriate for the kids and to the specialized needs of what the kids both need in a courtroom and there are types of relief that are just for them, right . Like special immigration juvenile status, you know. Thats just for them. So to talk about what some of those things are as well. Professor, may i ask a question . Sure, go ahead. Maria, just speaking of stakeholder relations, you mentioned the bestinterest document, this being worked on by the interagency working group. Is that the main way in which the young center has had relations with dhs . Do you guys have another any other sort of stakeholder relationships, especially with the office of chief counsel, and do you anticipate this is a document, once completed, that could be, you know, we could be providing or sort of collaborating with the trial attorneys . Yeah, i mean, we work with all of the agencies. And i just have to say that i mean, dhs has been one of the really good agencies to work with. I mean, the enforcement people have been wonderful. And again, i go back to this point that i think those charged with enforcement and decisionmaking have a really hard time having to do this with a child. In terms of the document, you know, we hope to finish it in the next couple of months. It has to go to the full interagency. Its been a subcommittee. It has to go to the full interagency working group, and thats all of the agencies plus ngos, most of whom are in this room today. And yes, that will be shared. I mean, it will be in two pieces. One will have footnotes. And the other piece, though, will be kind of a stepbystep heres what you would do if youre in the field to make sure youre looking at a childs best interests. So yes, that will thats the intention is to share it widely. Yes. Sounds wonderful. Thank you. Thanks for those questions, diane. Well go from side to side. On this side, please identify yourself. My name is constance freeman, and i work with the Community Outreach program. I work with a lot of the children after the o. R. R. Process. So i see them months, sometimes years, after theyve been released from the shelters. And im concerned, one about how many of the 14 to 15yearolds specifically that are not enrolled in school. And i want to know, how can we get that collaboration with the agencies to make sure that they are staying in school . Because i dont have a problem with accepting children and making sure theyre in school, but if theyre 14 years old and theyre out, im not sure that were not putting them at risk, that theyre run ago way from. And then also, i have a followup question for the ambassador from el salvador. I was amazed at how many children in those three countries are not in school. And i noticed in one of the south american countries, kids get, like, 80 or something to go to school, and if they get good grades, they get 100 bolivianos. I was wondering if those three countries could use funds from the Multinational Companies to fund so that the kids are in school and theyre not coming here without a day of education. So, i mean, ill take the first question. I mean, i think there arent enough resources anywhere. None of the agencies well, eoar doesnt have enough or o. R. R. Doesnt have enough. I will also say that recently ive heard that o. R. R. Is doing a lot to start providing more postrelease services for children. And i think theyve recently issued grants to start providing so after the child is released, theres somebody who is available to stay in contact, a social worker, for example. And to help make sure the kids go to school. So, again, though, i mean, i think some of it goes back to resources. And of course, everybody wants the kids in school, but i think we need more resources so that there can be more postrelease services for the kids. And i agree that after the kids get released i mean, sometimes theyre even more vulnerable than when theyre in custody. A child advocate stays with the child to the extent that the child wants. Kids can lose us, if they really want to. But i think this you know, we need these postrelief services for many more kids. You were right. One of the unfortunately, we have so many other countries with fairly low level of school attendance. Now, a couple of things. The new government has established three priorities. One of them being education. So education is going to be a priority in this administration. Second, there is a program thats starting now of conditional Cash Transfer precisely around those lines to give some economic support to families that keep the kids in school. Similar to something thats happening already in terms of health. Theres a task Condition Program to support mothers who take regularly their kids to the Health Clinics for control and so forth. And the third thing is that ironically, one of the reasons that we have had a lot of youth involvement in the gangs is that at some point during the 80s, in order to make more efficient the school infrastructure, schools started working on two shifts. So kids would be go in the morning, a group of kids would be in school in the morning, and another group of kids would go in the afternoon. What happened is that you have a lot of kids having a lot of free time. And this was something that created, among other things, many other things, but this also was a part of why a lot of kids joined the gangs. So one of the things that are being done now is to expand the program called fulltime schooling. The idea is to keep the kids as much time as possible in the school doing extracurricular activities. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. My name is anna gutierrez. Im a state legislator here in maryland. Originally from el salvador. Many questions, but i want to concentrate on something that we have been advocating for both locally, we formed a d. C. , maryland and Virginia Coalition to work with the students. And i think many of us in the audience probably are dealing more with what to do with those students once they come to our neighborhoods and in our states because it doesnt end with the federal role. But the federal role is important. One of the issues that we did was bring up Service Providers from around the nation to seek the legal representation issue. And im surprised that you havent mentioned or anybody has mentioned the disparities in the way that the legal the courts are working. We raised it, and what we saw are some states like maryland has a very friendly it has the first hearing, according to your 21day guideline, and then maybe the second one with sufficient time to prepare to get legal representation. There are other states, new york and california, where the Service Providers are just are just in desperation because of the rocket dockets. Could you address, what are the possibilities of your organization, barbara, to provide something more than just a 21day guidance . Because the response we heard was that a lot of the Immigration Courts are being left to the discretion of the state and of that court. And therefore, youre seeing this in unequal application and practices from one state to the other. And i think thats a very serious concern. So i just want to clarify that your question is about the Immigration Court system and not the Juvenile Court system in the state. No, not the Juvenile Court. No, the ones who are dealing with the children, the ones that have that first hearing. Right. I mean, the two are bizarrely interconnected, as maria mentioned. Juvenile courts are state court. Correct. Theyre not being called to a Juvenile Court. Theyre being called well, some of them are. With respect to one thing thats really interesting about this group of cases for our system, which can be very frustrating at times, is that some of the relief that is available to these children, and the relief that they seek, is adjudicated outside our court system. And so one of the forms of relief that they seek is special immigration juvenile status. So when a judge is trying to figure out, you know, how much time he should give a child thats looking to seek special immigrant juvenile status, they have to figure, okay, well, uscis is going to have to adjudicate a benefits application. Before the kid can go foreward, they have to go to state court juvenile proceedings. And so, you know, that does provide a real logistical challenge for us because there are states in which, you know, and counties in which, you know, as maria mentioned, a child can go to state Court Proceedings and get an order in three days. There are other places, chicago being one of them, where it takes just a really long time. And so when a judge is trying to figure out when to reschedule the kid, those things can come in. Now, with respect to what our guidance has been to judges for Immigration Court, the guidance that we give Immigration Judges is nationwide. Right . So its not were limited. We have one Immigration Court that has 59 locations. Its like what we like to say is the guidance that we give judges. It doesnt vary by being in one state or another. The guidance that weve given is that the children that are identified by dhs as priority cases get their first hearing within 21 days. Thereafter, the judge can continue if the child asks for a continuance, can continue the case in accordance with the law thats on the books right now. Its a goodcause standard. And then the judge determines in his or her discretion how long that continuance should be. And that and so it will vary with respect to the facts and circumstances of the particular case. What weve heard is that as routine in these two states, they are being called for their second appearance very shortly after the first appearance, without any possibility of legal representation to be, one, identified, and two, to be prepared. And that that is really even interfering because they then have to go in and file another motion. Im not a lawyer, but this is what ive heard over and over again is whats been happening. So it seems to me that because you are one centralized system with 59 representatives, that clarification of what would be expected. And even if there is no best interest of the child in written law, clearly in every state, i can tell you in my state, that is the guiding principle. And if that is not what is in practice being respected, i think theres something wrong. Right. So we did issue guidance on september 10th. That specifies that there are no there are no extra laws relating to how short continuances need to be or how long they need to be with respect to children. Only just that they do take a priority on the docket so that the continuance should be granted with respect to the facts and circumstances of the case rather than the courts docket. So, you know, we heard this concern, and we did issue guidance on september 10th. Yes . Yes. Go right ahead. Thanks. My name is ashima. Im an immigration attorney turned documentary filmmaker. Were working on a film specifically about this issue, Central American refugees filming in Central America but also some of the issues that were seeing in the u. S. My question is more for barbara as well. I wanted you to address some of the concerns identified by attorneys who have been volunteering at our facility. I know thats, you know, a family Detention Center, but nevertheless, some of the concerns thats putting it lightly, just some of the fasttrack deportations, the no access to sometimes translators, interpreters, longdistance judges who arent well versed in the law or the cases. I know things are improving, but from, you know, some of the reports i read, and people i talked to, its nowhere near where it should be. Do you have a specific concern in mind that you want me to address . Well, i mean, i havent read anything because i have been researching this particular topic. I havent read anything that the government has put forth to talk about artesia, but i read a lot from attorneys. Right. So i think with you know, with respect to family detention, i guess its somewhat germane given that there are children there, too. Theyre not accompanied. You know, with respect to the detention of families, you know, the artesia facility was put up quickly in response to the surge this summer. I think whats frustrating for i think us as an agency is that so much of the Detention Center and the concerns with respect to the Detention Center are out of our hands with respect to decisionmaking. You know, i. C. E. Handles detention. So when there are larger issues that i think people have brought to our attention, you know, so, for example, people have said, look, the tvs there are really tiny. And so when the judge is beaming in, you know, what you see on the side of the detainee is, you know, the individual the families who are there, theyre having a hard time seeing the judge. When we hear that kind of stuff, and people are very vocal with us to let us know what the issues are, you know, we cant buy new tvs and install them, right . Dhs does that. Its their facility. What we can do is go to dhs and say look, wed really like to change these tvs out. And so i think what were doing is on a very daily basis, having a lot of conversations with our counterparts at dhs about how to respond to some of the things that we can respond to. I think a lot of the criticism that weve heard overall from some of the advocates is that there is, you know, a generalized belief that families shouldnt be detained. Right . And so, to the extent that thats that that is what were hearing, you know, i with tell you that that is you know, thats a decision thats made sort of out of my hands, and certainly out of my logistical hands. And so one of the things we also heard was, look, youve got judges in one time zone. Youve got artesia in another time zone. Thats causing just confusion. So we changed from the judges in arlington hearing the cases to the judges in denver hearing the cases because now theyre all in the same time zone. And so we are trying were also working a lot, i think, with, you know, the bar in denver even before the cases got moved to denver were really active in trying to do pro bono with the folks in artesia. And so, you know, denver was a good spot because we thought we could assist in trying to make it a little easier on some of the pro bono attorneys there. So i think were doing what we can, you know, recognizing that, you know, we have to continue a dialogue with people. About what are the things we can do, particularly some of the smaller, you know, what are some of those small things that seem, well, why cant you just do it . Why cant you just buy the bigger tvs kind of thing, right . And working with our partners. I mean, understanding, of course, that there are a lot of limitations on us as the agency dealing with the Detention Center that we dont have control over. Thank you, barbara. Thank you. Hi there. My name is deana. Im a student here at georgetown law. Im here with fellow classmates of mine. We are part of a Campus Organization that has created the International Migrants bill of rights. And our specific project this semester is focused on Detention Centers in mexico. And we are creating a list of indicators to suggest that these Detention Centers go through. My indicator is focused on family unification. So i was wondering if anyone on the panel is able to offer myself and my classmates some advice and realities on what is going on in these Detention Centers, specifically with unaccompanied minors, whether their family or guardians are in mexico or cou