Unrepresented Children Still Being Fast-Tracked Through Immigration Hearings

Written by on February 6, 2015 in Asylum, Enforcement, Immigration Courts with 6 Comments

4628043944_f10d5f296d_bSince the government began “prioritizing” the deportation of unaccompanied children and mothers with children last summer, legal service providers and other court observers across the country have reported that immigration judges are giving children less time to find attorneys before moving forward in their cases. Now, children without attorneys are being forced to explain why, under our incredibly complex immigration laws, they should not be deported. And when they are unable to do so, unrepresented children are told to “voluntarily” depart or are ordered removed.

Last week, the child plaintiffs in J.E.F.M. v. Holder, a nationwide class action seeking to ensure that all children in immigration court have legal representation, submitted declarations from observers and attorneys describing problems that have resulted from these “rocket dockets” in five different immigration courts. In J.E.F.M., the plaintiffs are challenging the government’s long-standing failure to provide counsel to children in immigration court and asking the court to order the government to appoint legal representation for unrepresented children facing deportation.

As the declarations demonstrate, children need counsel immediately. In Dallas, court observers witnessed an aunt tearfully trying to submit an asylum application for her nephew even though the family did not seem to understand the application process or form. They also observed children agreeing to orders to leave the country after an immigration judge assured them that they did not qualify for relief to stay in the United States. But the judge makes these assurances after only a brief conversation with the child in court—in some cases, apparently in spite of signs that the children might be eligible for relief like Special Immigrant Juvenile Status.

At recent hearings in Atlanta and Houston, children received continuances of just two or three weeks to look for attorneys. In Atlanta, unrepresented children who decided to proceed on their own because they were unable to afford attorneys also were left with only two weeks to prepare and file their own asylum applications.

And this is only if the children are able to get to their hearings. If not, they may be ordered removed in absentia. Yet in many cases, the government is to blame for a child’s failure to appear since children regularly do not receive sufficient notice of their hearing dates or may be scheduled to appear in a court on the other side of the country, which can be especially problematic for children without attorneys. One lawyer provided a telling anecdote in her declaration: two of her child clients, who had never lived within the jurisdiction of the Atlanta Immigration Court, were nonetheless scheduled for hearings there on two separate occasions. After intervention from the attorney, both of the cases were eventually transferred to the appropriate court. But court staff informed the attorney that, for unrepresented children, the court will not transfer a case to another court unless a child appears first for a hearing in Atlanta. Such a policy leaves children with the choice between a prohibitively expensive trip or an in absentia removal order when the government mistakenly schedules them for a court hearing hundreds of miles away from where they live.

As the JEFM declarations show, children on priority dockets are too often rushed through immigration court with insufficient safeguards to ensure that they receive proper notice of their hearings and that they have a real opportunity to learn whether they may be eligible to remain in the United States. At the same time, the government is pushing hearings for “non-priority” adult cases to 2019. This mismatch of priorities is not fair—and the treatment of children is not constitutional. Children cannot have a truly fair hearing in immigration court without legal representation.

Photo by Douglas Palmer.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Subscribe

If you enjoyed this article, subscribe now to receive more just like it.

Subscribe via RSS Feed
  • Aunt Jj

    Where are the Parents,they were suppose to meet here? Using children as the subject,then pushing that,tells me this is a Communist,site!

  • Halt Amnesty

    Aunt Jj… illegal aliens don’t have or need parents, they have Obama to take care of them. Like Hillary Clinton says “it takes a village to raise children”. Wonder how that’s working out in the middle east?

    • She_patriot

      It takes a village of taxpayers to cover the cost of one illegal alien minor! Welfare, medicade, foodstamps, education, guardian, housing, transportation, clothing, lawyer and believe it or not the list does go on and on!

      • mary

        Approximately $159 a day, almost $60,000 a year of taxpayer money goes to pay for each and every one of these UAC (unaccompanied minor children) according to the HHS website. America needs a “dreamer” to get us out of this mess!

  • http://www.immigrationfilmfest.org Patti Absher

    A terrible miscarriage of justice with incredibly harsh outcomes for innocent kids whose only mistake was to be born on the wrong side of the border. They come from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, countries that are coming apart at the seams with terrible. Our misguided policies are sending them back to be slaughtered according to confirmed reports. What can we do to get more attention focused on the desperate need for legal representation for these children who would almost certainly be eligible for asylum ?

    • sandy

      What is misguided is our lousy boarder policies. We cannot save everyone and the USA and its tax base is tapped out. I feel sorry for their misfortune but how can you suggest that that burden be ours? It’s nonsensical.

Top