Children Facing Immigration Court Without Lawyers After Federal Legal-Aid Contract Lapses
Democrats called it 'cruel and inhumane' Monday after reports of very young children appearing before immigration judges alone. The administration says it is fully funding representation and demanding proof of services; federal law calls for counsel 'to the greatest extent practicable' but does not guarantee it.
By Evelyn Shaw, Constitution Explained
Published · 7 min read
The Overview
The facts, straight
BREAKING: Democratic lawmakers reacted Monday to reports of unaccompanied children appearing in immigration court without lawyers. This story may be updated. Times ET.
Unaccompanied migrant children are appearing before immigration judges without lawyers, The New York Times reported on Oct. 15 in its own reporting, under the headline "Migrant Children Without Lawyers Face Fast-Tracked Deportations Alone." The reports follow the July 31 expiration of the federal contract that had funded a nationwide network of nonprofit lawyers for those children.
On Monday, Democrats in Congress pushed back. Rep. Becca Balint of Vermont, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, posted at 10:03 a.m. ET:
Post: Rep. Becca Balint (@RepBeccaB) on X, Oct. 19, 2026, 10:03 a.m. ET.
"There are a lot of sick parts of our immigration system right now. One example is how toddlers are being forced to face immigration judges with absolutely no legal representation. It's cruel and inhumane."
At 1:13 p.m. ET, the committee's Democrats, who post as @HouseJudiciary, shared the Times story:
Post: House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) on X, Oct. 19, 2026, 1:13 p.m. ET.
What happened to the contract. For the past year, legal services for unaccompanied children in the care of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), part of the Department of Health and Human Services, ran through a bridge contract with the Acacia Center for Justice. Federal spending records show that contract was signed July 30, 2025, ran from Aug. 1, 2025, to July 31, 2026, and had $356.3 million obligated. Acacia said on Aug. 4 that it "did not accept a bridge contract" because doing so "would have required legal service providers to turn over confidential client information" as a condition of payment.
The administration says it was asking for basic proof of the work it was paying for. "The government has a right to know which children in its custody are receiving legal services paid for by American tax dollars," the Administration for Children and Families, ORR's parent agency, posted Aug. 3. "Demanding basic accountability is not unreasonable, it is a minimum standard."
In court. A group of legal-aid organizations has been suing HHS in federal court in California since March 2025. On April 29, 2025, Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin issued a preliminary injunction barring the government from "cutting off access to congressionally appropriated funding" for direct legal representation of unaccompanied children. On Aug. 6, 2026, she ordered the government to release funds it had withheld since December 2025. The government had cited "invoice substantiation concerns" in a dispute with Acacia; the court said the government may not condition payment "on receipt of any further information from Acacia." The judge also noted that the Acacia contract "expired July 31, 2026," and that "it appears to the Court that no mechanism presently exists" for complying with the injunction, and she ordered the government to report on its compliance.
What the administration has done since. HHS has moved to replace the Acacia network:
- Federal spending records list a "Legal Services Bridge 2.0" contract to a group called Our Rescue, running Aug. 7, 2026, to Feb. 6, 2027, with $158.1 million obligated.
- On Aug. 6, ORR announced its intent to award up to $150 million to Burke Law Group of Houston for legal orientation, consultation and representation. Radio Purple could not confirm whether that award was finalized.
- On Sept. 18, the Government Accountability Office denied Acacia's protest of a new HHS solicitation for children's legal services, finding the agency had "articulated a reasonable basis" for its invoicing documentation requirements.
- On Sept. 29, HHS created an Unaccompanied Alien Children Legal Representation Division in its Office of the General Counsel. Its attorneys "provide direct legal advice and counsel" to children and may "represent individual UAC as counsel in immigration proceedings." The notice says the division works "independently of" ORR on any case in which it represents a child.
What the Left Says
The progressive and Democratic case
Critics say young children cannot fairly defend themselves in an adversarial court. In a video attached to her post, Balint says, "Imagine a two or three year old being asked questions in court about their deportation proceedings. That's what's happening right now." She adds that "my Republican colleagues tried to tell us it wasn't happening."
The House Judiciary Democrats' post reads: "In Trump's America, 1-year-old children are expected to represent themselves in immigration court. For years, our government has provided vulnerable kids with basic legal representation. Now Trump Administration is stripping that right away, forcing children to represent themselves in court to drive up Trump's deportation numbers."
Acacia has argued that the new arrangements fall short. "Kids need lawyers who understand how to work with kids," the group said Aug. 5, adding that it believes "children must continue to be represented by independent attorneys who specialize in immigration law."
Where Reality Likely Sits
Radio Purple's analysis
Both sides agree, in their own words, that children need lawyers in immigration court. ACF called it "critical," and Democrats call its absence "cruel and inhumane." The dispute is over who provides that counsel, how it is paid for and documented, and how quickly a replacement network can take over the cases Acacia's providers handled.
There is existing common ground to build on. Since Jan. 29, 2025, the immigration courts have operated under reinstated guidance, OPPM 17-03, that tells courts to hear children's cases "on a separate docket or at a fixed time in the week or month" wherever feasible and to "employ child-sensitive questioning." It also says judges are "required to provide a list of pro bono legal service providers." The TVPRA itself tells HHS to "make every effort to utilize the services of pro bono counsel."
A lasting fix would likely have to come from Congress. The Fair Day in Court for Kids Act, which would provide counsel for unaccompanied children, has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Mazie Hirono (S. 1297, April 2025) and in the House by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (H.R. 9259, June 2026). As introduced, the House bill's cosponsors are all Democrats, and the Senate bill's are Democrats plus independent Sen. Bernie Sanders. Radio Purple found no bipartisan bill on the issue.
What the Right Says
The conservative and Republican case
Supporters of the administration's approach start with the law. Immigration removal proceedings are civil, not criminal, and the federal statute on counsel provides only that a person "shall have the privilege of being represented (at no expense to the Government) by such counsel, authorized to practice in such proceedings, as he shall choose." Congress has never created a guaranteed right to appointed counsel in immigration court. The immigration courts' own guidance notes that "Neither the INA nor the regulations permit Immigration Judges to appoint a legal representative."
For unaccompanied children, the 2008 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act says the HHS secretary "shall ensure, to the greatest extent practicable and consistent with section 292 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1362), that all unaccompanied alien children who are or have been in the custody of the Secretary or the Secretary of Homeland Security, and who are not described in subsection (a)(2)(A), have counsel to represent them in legal proceedings or matters and protect them from mistreatment, exploitation, and trafficking." That is a duty to try, not a guarantee.
The administration says it has kept paying and that the problem predates the contract's end. "ORR has been complying and fully funding legal representation at an average of approximately $20 million per month," ACF posted in August. "But, we continue to see an average 60% of children appearing in immigration court without an attorney." ACF said it asked Acacia for "data on what legal services are being rendered and for which child," and that "Acacia failed to provide this documentation."
Supporters also point to longstanding failures in tracking children after release. In an August 2024 management alert, the Homeland Security inspector general found that ICE transferred "more than 448,000" unaccompanied children to HHS from fiscal 2019 to 2023 but "was not able to account for the location of all UCs who were released by HHS and did not appear as scheduled in immigration court." ICE reported "more than 32,000 UCs failed to appear for their immigration court hearings" over those years, and as of May 2024 ICE "had not served NTAs on more than 291,000 UCs," meaning they did not yet have a court date.
Radio Purple found no new on-the-record statements Monday from Republican members of Congress, DHS, the Justice Department or the White House on the latest reports.
Sources & Citations
- The New York Times, “Migrant Children Without Lawyers Face Fast-Tracked Deportations Alone”, October 15, 2026.
- X (@RepBeccaB), “Rep. Becca Balint post on X”, October 19, 2026.
- X (@HouseJudiciary), “House Judiciary Committee Democrats post on X”, October 19, 2026.
- X (@ACFHHS), “Administration for Children and Families thread on X”, August 3, 2026.
- Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, “8 U.S. Code § 1362 - Right to counsel”, January 1, 2026.
- Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, “8 U.S. Code § 1232 - Enhancing efforts to combat the trafficking of children”, January 1, 2026.
- USAspending.gov, “Contract 75P00125C00016, Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) Legal Services Bridge”, January 1, 2026.
- USAspending.gov, “Contract 7571MN26C00029, Legal Services Bridge 2.0”, January 1, 2026.
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (via CourtListener), “Order Granting Motion to Enforce Preliminary Injunction, Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. HHS, No. 4:25-cv-02847 (N.D. Cal.)”, August 6, 2026.
- U.S. Government Accountability Office (filed as Dkt. 206-1, via CourtListener), “Decision, Matter of: Acacia Center for Justice, B-424162.4”, September 18, 2026.
- Federal Register, “Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority (HHS Office of the General Counsel)”, September 29, 2026.
- Federal Register, “Announcement of the Intent To Award a Single-Source Cooperative Agreement to Burke Law Group, PLLC”, August 6, 2026.
- Acacia Center for Justice, “Acacia Center for Justice statement, Aug. 4, 2026”, August 4, 2026.
- DHS Office of Inspector General, “Management Alert - ICE Cannot Monitor All Unaccompanied Migrant Children Released from DHS and HHS Custody (OIG-24-46)”, August 19, 2024.
- Executive Office for Immigration Review, “OPPM 17-03: Guidelines for Immigration Court Cases Involving Juveniles, Including Unaccompanied Alien Children”, January 1, 2017.
- Executive Office for Immigration Review, “PM 25-10: Cancellation of DM 24-01 and Reinstatement of OPPM 17-03”, January 29, 2025.
- Congress.gov, “S. 1297, Fair Day in Court for Kids Act of 2025”, April 3, 2025.
- GovInfo, “H.R. 9259, Fair Day in Court for Kids Act of 2026 (introduced text)”, June 11, 2026.
Positions above are attributed to the public statements and published reporting cited here. Quotations are taken from these sources; Radio Purple does not publish unattributed or invented quotes. See an error? Request a correction.