Judge Forces Feds to Reinstate Legal Aid for Migrant Kids

A federal judge has issued a temporary order mandating the restoration of legal funding for thousands of undocumented children in the U.S. without legal guardians. Late Tuesday night, U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin, appointed by President Biden, emphasized that immigrant rights advocates raised significant concerns regarding the government’s obligation to provide legal counsel to unaccompanied minors under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008.

In her seven-page ruling, Judge Martinez-Olguin noted that maintaining legal representation for unaccompanied children supports efficiency and fairness in the immigration process. As a result, she has temporarily halted any government actions to withdraw services or funds until April 16, with a preliminary injunction hearing potentially on the horizon.

The judge argued that ending funding for legal representation, without a plan for continuity, may violate Congress’s directives outlined in the Act. The suit, brought forth by organizations including Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto, Immigrant Defenders Law Center, and the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, contends that the administration’s abrupt funding cuts put children at immediate risk.

During a hearing on Tuesday, plaintiff’s counsel Carson Scott highlighted the irreversible harm caused by the funding cut, describing it as an existential threat to their ability to represent vulnerable children who often face immigration court without legal aid. “The only people in danger are the thousands of children, many of whom cannot speak English or are non-verbal,” he stated.

Scott further elaborated on the moral responsibility of legal service providers, emphasizing that representation serves the public interest and advocates for the safety of those children who have suffered abuse while in custody. The plaintiffs seek a court mandate declaring the defendants’ actions illegal under the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as an injunction to prevent future funding cuts.

Conversely, Justice Department attorney Jonathan Ross argued that the plaintiffs were attempting to undermine the discretionary powers of federal agencies. He asserted that legal service providers remain able to offer pro bono legal assistance, despite recent funding cuts. Ross maintained that while unaccompanied children are entitled to legal representation, the allocation of resources remains at the discretion of agency executives.

The complaint points out that the Interior Department ordered services to cease work in March, despite available funds allocated through September 2027. The immigrant rights groups argue that this funding termination contradicts the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, which mandates that the government must ensure legal counsel for unaccompanied minors to the greatest extent practicable.

Furthermore, the groups highlighted that over 26,000 children stand to lose legal representation due to the funding cuts, many of whom have arrived in the U.S. without parents or guardians and lack proficiency in English. The complaint articulates three main claims under the Administrative Procedure Act, asserting that the funding termination is unlawful, arbitrary, and a violation of established government policy.