Late yesterday, President Trump announced that Kirstjen Nielsen has resigned as the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Trump said that Kevin McAleenan, the commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), will serve as Acting Secretary.

Nielsen’s tenure as head of one of the country’s largest government agencies was a humanitarian catastrophe, consistently showing a clear disregard for civil rights and people’s lives. Indeed, just over a week prior to her resignation, CBP agents forced asylum-seekers to sleep outside beneath a bridge in El Paso in extremely low temperatures and deprived of medical care.

Implemented family separation and expanded immigration detention

The most infamous chapter in Nielsen’s time at DHS was her implementation of an unfathomably cruel family separation policy. The administration tore thousands of children from their parents — without even keeping track of many of the families it separated — in an effort to punish and deter families who were lawfully seeking asylum in the United States. McAleenan, Nielsen’s acting replacement, signed a memo recommending the policy.

Nielsen’s imposition of the family separation policy was a humanitarian and legal disaster that was ultimately curtailed by an ACLU lawsuit and immense public outcry. But even after the administration formally ended the policy, Nielsen continued to shamelessly lie about it, going so far as to deny that the policy ever existed. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) asked the FBI to investigate whether Nielsen committed perjury when she testified to Congress that “we’ve never had a policy for family separation.”

A DHS inspector general report found that the department failed to track the children they separated from their parents, and DHS used information from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to arrest and deport sponsors and potential sponsors of the detained children. And yet, the separation of families at the border continues.

The detention and separation of families was part of a broad attack on asylum-seekers and immigrants generally under Nielsen.

She presided over a huge expansion in immigration detention. The number of people in DHS custody skyrocketed during her tenure, reaching 50,000 on average per day in March. Since the department’s detention spending soared past the already bloated-budget approved by Congress, DHS had to funnel dollars from other agencies, including FEMA funds meant for disaster relief, in order to cover the costs of jailing immigrants in facilities notorious for substandard medical care, abusive practices, and violations of people’s constitutional rights.

Restricted asylum and protections for immigrants

She attempted to curtail asylum protections in numerous unlawful ways. For example, she ordered that people who had entered the country in between official points of entry were not eligible for asylum, even though United States law provides precisely the opposite. In November, the ACLU and partners won an initial ruling preventing the asylum ban from going into effect.

She also terminated Temporary Protected Status for people from El Salvador, Honduras, and Nepal and failed to redesignate TPS for those from Somalia, Syria, and Yemen, despite the fact that violence and natural disasters have displaced tens of thousands of people in their home countries. While she was serving in the administration but prior to her time as DHS Secretary, Trump also announced the termination of TPS for people from Haiti, Nicaragua, and Sudan. The ACLU of Southern California and partners obtained a ruling in October blocking the termination of TPS for El Salvador, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Sudan, citing “serious questions as to whether a discriminatory purpose was a motivating factor” in their decisions.

After Trump reportedly made racist comments regarding immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti, and African nations, and instead wanted to prioritize immigrants from Norway, Nielsen denied to Congress that the president used the word, but explained that he “was using tough language.” She also denied that his remarks were racist, bizarrely insisting that she herself didn’t know that Norway was a predominantly white country.

Nielsen also was in charge of implementing Trump’s Muslim ban — she was confirmed to her post one day after the Supreme Court allowed the third version of the ban to take full effect — and served as Chief of Staff to former DHS Secretary John Kelly during the implementation of the first and second versions of the Muslim ban.

Nielsen also championed the attempt to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), issuing a memo purporting to justify the administration’s decision to end the program, which provides protections for certain young immigrants, but was rebuffed by a federal court.

Paved the way to build Trump’s wall and expanded warrantless searches at the border

When Trump shut down the government for weeks in order to secure billions of more dollars to build his border wall, Nielsen was consistently at his side and parroting his false talking points. Even before the shutdown, Nielsen helped build Trump’s wall by waiving federal, state, local, and tribal laws and undermining border communities in order to accelerate its construction, and afterwards championed the president’s bogus “national emergency” declaration to build the wall, an unconstitutional order that the ACLU has challenged in court. The border wall would increase the number of deaths among migrants as they are “funneled” to harsher domains.

Along the border, the number of warrantless searches of electronic devices, such as cellphones and laptops, by CBP agents increased under the Trump administration. While Nielsen did not start the policy of warrantless searches, she defended DHS’s practices that violate people’s Fourth Amendment rights — practices that the ACLU, together with the Electronic Frontier Foundation — is challenging in a groundbreaking lawsuit. Under Nielsen’s leadership, social media “vetting” expanded dramatically, despite concerns about unfairly targeting Muslim immigrants and immigrants from Muslim-majority countries, and expanding to all immigrant and nonimmigrant visa applicants.

Nielsen’s disastrous and unlawful policies could fill a book, and this is only a summary of some of her most egregious actions, which extend to tear-gassing toddlers and being in charge while two children died in Border Patrol custody.

Her resignation comes only days after Trump withdrew his nominee to lead Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), saying that he wants “tougher” people to carry out his anti-immigrant policies. Seeing as Nielsen was one of Trump’s most brutal cabinet secretaries, this does not bode well for the president’s permanent replacement.

All in all, Nielsen’s legacy as an apologist and enabler of Trump’s detention and deportation machine will go down in history as one of the crucial — and cruel — moments of this presidency.

Brian Tashman, Political Researcher and Strategist, ACLU

Reproductive rights are under attack yet again in the Florida Legislature.  Legislators have filed several bills this session that block access to women’s healthcare and chip away at our constitutional right to determine for ourselves whether and when to have a child.

This morning, the Senate Health Policy Committee passed SB 1774, a bill that would force minors to give birth against their will. Let’s be clear: Medical decisions should be made by patients and their doctors, not politicians. SB 1774  mandates that every young woman under the age of 18, in addition to notifying their parents, also obtain parental consent in order to seek a safe and legal termination of her pregnancy. Current law already requires minors to notify their parents.  This law goes much further -- it puts veto power in the hands of parents who, unfortunately,  may have a history of abuse and often do not have the best interests of their minor child in mind. Moreover, under this bill, a minor deemed too immature to make decisions about her pregnancy, is considered mature enough to have a child.  The companion House bill, HB 1335, has already passed two committees in the House as well, and is schedule for its third and final committee tomorrow (Tuesday, April 9). See below for more about these and other dangerous bills that force women to give birth against their will.

And here’s a novel idea for our elected officials -- if you want to decrease abortions, instead of infringing on our constitutional rights and preventing access to safe and legal reproductive health care, how about creating societal structures that would positively impact a woman’s decision to have a child (like free child care; access to low- or no-cost health care; paid parental leave; paying parents who stay home with children an annual salary for their work raising their children and foregoing work outside the home)?  While we are at it, the most effective way to decrease abortions, at absolutely no cost to taxpayers, is to stop sexual assault and sexual coercion. Governments, institutions, laws, and policies contribute to the systematic devaluation of the lives and safety of women and girls every day by failing to respond to gender-based violence and discriminating against those subjected to such violence.

MANDATING PARENTAL CONSENT
 
SB 1774, filed by State Senator Stargel, Lakeland, and its House companion bill, HB 1335, filed by Representative Grall - would require minors to obtain the consent of their parents or guardians before having abortions, unless absolved from doing so by the courts. The bill, as mentioned above, would be more restrictive than current Florida law, which already requires minors to notify parents or guardians before having abortions.

This bill is unconstitutional, unwise, and unpopular with Floridians. The Florida Supreme Court in 1989 struck down a similar parental-consent law, finding that it violated state constitutional privacy rights.

Leading medical groups, including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, have opposed these laws.
 
SIX-WEEK ABORTION BAN
 
HB 235, sponsored by State Representative Hill, Pensacola, would make it a felony to perform an abortion on a pregnant woman after a fetal heartbeat has been detected. This can be as early as six weeks into a woman’s pregnancy—two weeks after a first missed period—and well before many women even realize that they are pregnant. An identical bill, SB 792, has been filed by Senator Baxley, Ocala. These bills are blatantly unconstitutional.
 
Supporters of these bills have a clear motivation: they want to eliminate all abortion in Florida and try to bring a case to the U.S. Supreme Court to directly challenge Roe v. Wade.

The effort to adopt a fetal heartbeat bill in Florida follows similar actions in other states. (See chart below.) To date, these laws have been challenged in each state and courts have struck down such laws as unconstitutional attempts to deprive women of their reproductive rights.
 
The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held for over 40 years that states may not ban abortion prior to viability.  The Court has also made clear that states are prohibited from drawing a line at a particular gestational age to establish fetal viability and that the determination of viability must be left to the physician’s judgment in each individual case.

By imposing criminal penalties against doctors, this bill threatens doctors who exercise their best medical judgment.

Leading medical groups, including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, have opposed these laws.
 
20-WEEK ABORTION BAN
 
A third bill before the legislature - SB 558, sponsored by Senator Gruters of Sarasota - would ban abortion in Florida after 20 weeks of gestation, and similarly violates the U.S. Supreme Court viability standard. In addition, the 20-week standard again usurps the duty of a physician to use her or his judgment to make a determination in each individual case.

Every pregnant woman faces her own unique circumstances, challenges, and potential complications. It is not always possible for a woman to get an abortion without overcoming obstacles and delays. Many things can stand in her way, such as not knowing she is pregnant, needing time to gather funds to cover the cost of care and travel, a lack of doctors who provide abortion nearby, and a host of other barriers put in place by politicians. All too often, politically motivated obstacles and restrictions on access to abortion force women to get abortions later and later in pregnancy.

Additionally, women with cancer, diabetes, epilepsy or other seizure disorders, and high blood pressure may face dangerous complications at or past 20 weeks that can put their health in serious jeopardy. Similarly, some women may develop conditions during their pregnancies that seriously threaten their health, such as preeclampsia and placental abruption.

Only one percent of women have abortions after 20 weeks, and these can involve rare, severe fetal anomalies (most fetal anomalies are only detectable at 20 weeks) and serious risks to a woman’s health.

In these situations, it is crucial for a woman to have unfettered access to all of her options based on her unique circumstances in consultation with her medical provider and the people she trusts and confides in.

Additionally Senator Gruters bill fails to contain exceptions for victims of rape and incest who—for one of many understandable reasons—often may not have filed a police report. It also contains no exceptions for when a woman learns that there are serious anomalies in the fetus. This ban will especially burden poor women who must come up with funds for both the procedure and travel costs.

Again, the American Medical Association and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists oppose 20-week abortion bans.
 
SIX-WEEK ABORTIONS BANS STRUCK DOWN AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

IOWA

Last year Iowa’s governor signed a bill into law that bans abortion pre-viability. A state judge recently ruled the law is unconstitutional.

NORTH DAKOTA

In 2013, a six-week abortion ban was signed into law. A federal district court blocked the law and found it unconstitutional based on protections under Roe v. Wade. The case was appealed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals where the bill was also blocked. Shortly after, another attempt to appeal the circuit court decision was made to the U.S. Supreme Court, which refused to hear the case.

OHIO

In December of 2018, Gov. John Kasich vetoed a six-week abortion ban that was introduced and passed by the state legislature. Gov. Kasich stated that the bill undermines the U.S. Supreme Court’s current rulings on abortion and cited the cost burden a lawsuit would pose to Ohio’s taxpayers.

ARKANSAS

A 12-week abortion ban went into effect in 2013, was challenged in federal court, and later found unconstitutional. The state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case in 2016.

ARIZONA

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit struck down 20-week bans in Idaho and Arizona as unconstitutional. Arizona appealed this decision, but the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case, so the law remains permanently enjoined. The U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent decision on abortion rights, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, reaffirmed that abortion is a constitutionally-protected right subject to heightened judicial scrutiny.