The Daily Populous Thursday April 24th, 2025 night edition
Authored by gothamist.com and submitted by Shlazeri

In shelters across New York, migrant children sit in front of computer and TV screens, appearing virtually in real court proceedings. They swivel in chairs, walk in circles and play with their hair — while immigration judges address them on the screens in front of them.

“The reason we’re here is because the government of the United States wants you to leave the United States,” Judge Ubaid ul-Haq, presiding from a courtroom on Varick Street, told a group of about a dozen children on a recent morning on Webex.

“It’s my job to figure out if you have to leave,” ul-Haq continued. “It’s also my job to figure out if you should stay.”

The parties included a 7-year-old boy, wearing a shirt emblazoned with a pizza cartoon, who spun a toy windmill while the judge spoke. There was an 8-year-old girl and her 4-year-old sister, in a tie-dye shirt, who squeezed a pink plushy toy and stuffed it into her sleeve. None of the children were accompanied by parents or attorneys, only shelter workers who helped them log on to the hearing.

Immigrant advocates and lawyers say an increasing number of migrant children are making immigration court appearances without the assistance of attorneys, which they say will lead to more children getting deported.

The Trump administration on March 21 terminated part of a $200 million contract that funds attorneys and other legal services for unaccompanied children. Those are children who arrive without parents or legal guardians — and typically instead come with aunts, uncles or older siblings, according to immigration attorneys.

While the contract termination is being challenged in court, immigrant advocates say the impact is already being felt, as lawyer groups pull back on services – leaving some children on their own.

“How is a child supposed to navigate this?” said Beth Krause, supervising attorney of the Immigrant Youth Project at the Legal Aid Society. She noted many adults find themselves confused and disadvantaged in immigration court proceedings.

The now-terminated contract paid for attorneys to represent 26,000 children across the country and “friend of the court” programs for children, which provide attorneys in court to help pro se respondents navigate the court process. The figures were provided by the Acacia Center for Justice, the nonprofit that manages the contract and doles out money to other providers across the country.

The federal contract funnels $18 million to nine legal providers across New York state to represent some 1,800 children, according to Sierra Kraft, executive director of the ICARE Coalition, a New York-based organization that advocates for expanding access to legal representation for immigrant children.

Kraft said that before the contract was terminated, she saw 30% to 40% of children in a given docket without lawyers. Now, she said, the number has increased to 50% to 60%.

Without representation, the children are more likely to be ordered deported, according to Meena Shah, co-managing director of the Legal Services Center at The Door, a New York City-based nonprofit.

Nearly all of the people – 96% – appearing in New York state immigration courts without legal counsel are eventually ordered deported, according to data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. Meanwhile, fewer than a quarter – 23% – of those with representation are deported.

Immigration lawyers leave no doubt about prospects for children appearing without counsel.

“That child will be ordered deported from this country — that could all happen without that child ever speaking with an attorney and given the opportunity to obtain representation,” Shah said. “The cruelty is really apparent to all of us out here in the field.”

Migrant children who arrive in the United States without parents or legal guardians are considered “unaccompanied children,” and are transferred to shelters run by the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement.

Most children are then transferred out of shelters and placed with adults called sponsors to take care of them. A sponsor can be a parent already living in the United States, an adult relative or a licensed program like another youth shelter, according to a report by the Vera Institute of Justice. In a last-resort scenario when when family reunification doesn’t appear possible, a sponsor could be another adult approved by the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the report notes.

In recent years, the number of unaccompanied children arriving in the United States reached record highs, peaking at nearly 129,904 in the fiscal year ending in 2022, according to Office of Refugee Resettlement data. Last fiscal year, 98,356 unaccompanied children entered the country, still tens of thousands higher than the numbers that came in 2020 and the years prior.

The vast majority of the unaccompanied children are Spanish speakers, hailing from Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador or Mexico.

Children who enter the United States without authorization are placed into deportation proceedings, just like adults in that situation. Unlike in criminal court, people — including adults and children — in immigration court aren’t guaranteed pro bono attorneys if their incomes fall below a certain threshold.

Before the federal contract was terminated, only a handful of children usually appeared at ul-Haq’s hearings, according to Kevin Longhany, attorney for the New York City office of Church World Service, one of the nonprofits representing unaccompanied minors under the contract. Ul-Haq is the main judge handling the cases of unaccompanied children in shelters.

Local attorneys would appear as “friends of the court” for unaccompanied migrant children living in shelters during their immigration court proceedings.

Kraft said attorneys acting as friends of the court play a vital role, acting as a kind of advocate for children without attorneys. They usually ask the judge for more time for the children to find attorneys, according to Longhany and Kraft. The attorneys may also have done legal screenings for the children, to find out if they’re eligible for particular forms of immigration relief, Kraft said.

Nonprofit legal groups representing unaccompanied migrant children say they are now rushing to plug massive funding gaps. Some have laid off staff; others are considering layoffs in the future. Several groups say they’re making impassioned pleas to private funders and foundations. Many providers say they have stopped taking on new clients.

“We’re just scrambling to try to replace the funding, at least partially … if possible,” Kraft said.

A federal judge recently ordered the Trump administration to temporarily restore the contract, but funding still isn’t flowing to legal providers, who continue to face difficult decisions about how to move forward.

“That’s part of the challenge here is just the uncertainty,” said Kristin Brown, the president and CEO of Empire Justice Center. “It makes it really difficult to run an organization.”

Brown’s group, which represents about 90 to 100 unaccompanied children across New York state, recently laid off two immigration attorneys due to the federal funding cuts. The federal contract for unaccompanied child representation provided the group $600,000 annually, a significant portion of the organization’s $12 million budget.

At The Door, the Board of Directors has agreed to fund the group’s services for unaccompanied children through June 30. Kelsey Louie, the Door’s CEO, said he’s set up dozens of meetings with funders — but many of those funders have been inundated with requests from other organizations as well.

The federal contract provided $4.3 million to the Door annually, representing 60% of the budget for the group’s legal services center, and 12% of the organization’s overall budget.

“This isn’t like we get to plan for the future,” Louie said. “This is trying to fill a $4 million dollar gap immediately.”

The Door, Empire Justice Center, ICARE and several other legal groups sent a letter to Gov. Kathy Hochul on April 4, calling on her to help replace the $18 million in funding provided by the now-terminated federal contract. A spokesperson for Hochul didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Throughout the rest of the recent immigration hearing, ul-Haq explained to the children their rights and responsibilities through a Spanish interpreter — like the right to find an attorney, and the need to tell the court if their addresses change.

He adjusted his language to be kid-friendly, explaining in detail what a “right” is and what “asylum” is, with a gentle lilt. Immigration judges are required to take extra time to explain the proceedings in a "child-friendly" way, per Department of Justice directives.

When a Spanish interpreter showed up, ul-Haq told her, “They are quite young, so I’ll be going slow and trying to explain everything I say.”

Ul-Haq asked each of the older children if they wanted more time to find attorneys. They all responded yes. For the younger children, ul-Haq automatically gave them extra time.

At the end of the hearing, he thanked each of the very young children for being there.

“You and your sister were very good girls today,” he told the 8-year-old girl and her 4-year-old sister in the tie-dye shirt.

He asked the 7-year-old boy who had been spinning a windmill, “What’s that on your shirt?” A pizza, the boy said.

“You know what’s funny?” ul-Haq replied, adding that he had pizza drawings on his socks. He lifted his foot into the air, in front of his video camera, to show the boy.

But some of the children offered scant evidence they understood what was going on.

At the beginning of the court proceedings, ul-Haq asked the group of children appearing virtually if they understood the Spanish interpreter. Some said “sí.” Others nodded. A few laughed.

Then, ul-Haq asked if any of the children had a first language other than Spanish.

The 4-year-old girl in the tie-dye shirt raised her hand, dangling her pink plushy above her head. It wasn’t clear – was she responding to the question, or just playing with her toy?

A woman off-screen said, “I’m her case manager,” referring to herself as a social worker in charge of the child. “She speaks Spanish.”

Ul-Haq sighed and spoke into his microphone: “The court does have some very young respondents, and we will endure as we try to explain as best as possible.”

Fit-Significance-436 on April 23rd, 2025 at 16:06 UTC »

It’s important too see what is actually occurring in deportation hearings, from article: “parties included a 7-year-old boy, wearing a shirt emblazoned with a pizza cartoon, who spun a toy windmill while the judge spoke. There was an 8-year-old girl and her 4-year-old sister, in a tie-dye shirt, who squeezed a pink plushy toy and stuffed it into her sleeve. None of the children were accompanied by parents or attorneys, only shelter workers who helped them log on to the hearing”

purple_plasmid on April 23rd, 2025 at 16:02 UTC »

This is unfortunately not new, children are not guaranteed council counsel in immigration court.

John Oliver did a whole segment on it a few years back

I_need_a_date_plz on April 23rd, 2025 at 15:46 UTC »

Dude what the fuck? How can a judge see this in the courtroom and not lose their fucking shit?