- The decision is now in the hands of U.S. District Judge Sul Ozerden. Mississippi’s Attorney General urged Ozerden to cease federal monitoring or if he denies to grant that motion, to set an evidentiary hearing “to fully develop the record.”
The Mississippi Attorney General’s office argues that the state has demonstrated constitutional compliance warranting dismissal of federal oversight of its child welfare system despite push back from lawyers representing foster children in the state.
Olivia Y. v. Barbour was filed in March 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, alleging that Mississippi’s foster care system was failing to adequately protect children in its custody and provide necessary services in violation of their federal constitutional rights. This lawsuit sought court-ordered changes in the system.
Since that time, federal monitoring has been in place as the Mississippi Department of Child Protective Services carries out its mission.
Attorneys representing the state of Mississippi said this week that despite claims made by counsel for foster children, a constitutionally adequate child welfare system is not synonymous with full compliance with the 2nd Modified Settlement Agreement and Reform Plan. That plan was enacted in 2018 and gave the Northern Division federal court continuing jurisdiction to enforce the terms which set forth that the state was to maintain the child welfare infrastructure, standards, and outcomes within specified timeframes statewide, among other provisions.
The Attorney General’s office contends that the systemic reforms Mississippi has made have addressed the alleged constitutional violations that gave rise to the litigation.
“The Court’s continued enforcement of the 2nd MSA serves only to perpetuate judicial oversight of a state agency that has demonstrated it is not deliberately indifferent,” the state argued, saying the relevant constitutional question is whether Mississippi officials are aware of a substantial risk and have consciously disregarded it.
“The record shows Defendants have done the opposite,” the filing reiterates, noting that maltreatment-in-care has dropped more than 60% under the reforms, from1.94% in 2020 to 0.74% in 2025.
Among the reforms Mississippi points to as examples of its continued efforts to address the allegations in Olivia Y. are multiple legislative packages binding future administrations, improved caseload performance (from 60% Met to 90% Met), salary realignments, technology overhauls, and workforce stabilization.
Plaintiffs still say not enough has been done to warrant Mississippi being dismissed from federal oversight, pointing to select cases where shortfalls have been seen.
Yet, the Attorney General’s office told the court that Mississippi has identified risks, marshaled resources, enacted legislation, rebuilt staffing, modernized technology, and restructured the Department of Child Protective Services to protect children’s personal security and reasonably safe living conditions.
“That is constitutional compliance, not deliberate indifference,” the state’s filing concludes. “Plaintiffs’ conflation of 2nd MSA performance with constitutional liability cannot obscure this reality… The Court should grant Defendants’ Motion and dismiss this action or, alternatively, vacate the 2nd MSA.”
The decision is now in the hands of U.S. District Judge Sul Ozerden. Mississippi’s Attorney General urged Ozerden to cease federal monitoring or if he denies to grant that motion, to set an evidentiary hearing “to fully develop the record.”
