Immigration courtrooms in the San Francisco Bay and surrounding areas have seen an increase of “unaccompanied alien children” (UAC) in court for removal proceedings. Most of these children, sometimes as young as four years old, do not have legal representation. In 2017 California had the second highest number of UACs in removal proceedings. While volunteer immigration attorneys, state funding, and organizations that provide legal aid to these immigrant children are more easily accessible in larger cities such as San Francisco, for immigrant children hundreds of miles away in the Central Valley and Fresno County areas, these resources are hard to access. “We’ve seen children from the Central Valley who have been to court four or five times without an attorney,” Katie Annand, managing attorney for the Kids in Need of Defense (KIND) organization, says. “They’ve had to pay $200 each time to get a ride up here for court, so they are coming up to court just to say ‘I don’t have an attorney.’”
Read moreOPINION: Those in Immigration Court Should Be Provided Legal Assistance Regardless of Ability to Pay
It’s a common scene in any episode of Law & Order: the detective puts the suspect’s wrists in handcuffs while reciting: “You have the right to remain silent, anything you do or say can be used against you in a court of law; you have the right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided to you.” (Emphasis mine.) The recognizable “DUN DUN” then gongs as the show goes to a commercial break. It’d be natural to assume, then, that people in all kinds of legal proceedings should have an attorney provided to them, regardless of their ability to pay. In immigration court, however, this is not always the case, as a recent ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals made clear.
Read moreThe Washington Post: “Immigration judges say proposed quotas from Justice Dept. threaten independence”
The Trump administration is attempting to impose “numeric performance standards” on federal immigration judges in order to reduce the immense backlog of cases, a move that many fear will threaten judicial independence. In a proposal made by the White House earlier this month as part of negotiations regarding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, the Trump administration says that their intention is to “establish performance metrics for immigration judges.” More specifically, documents obtained by the Washington Post show that the Justice Department "intends to implement numeric performance standards to evaluate Judge performance." Dana Leigh Marks, the spokeswoman and former president of the National Association of Immigration Judges, says this is alarming. “That is a huge, huge, huge encroachment on judicial independence. It’s trying to turn immigration judges into assembly-line workers.”
Read moreThe Nation: “The Airport Lawyers Who Stood Up to Trump Are Under Attack”
The Northwest Immigrant Rights Project (NWIRP), a Seattle nonprofit that offers legal aid to immigrants facing deportation and a group that was at the forefront of fighting President Trump’s Muslim travel ban, is facing disciplinary action from Jeff Sessions’s Department of Justice (DOJ). Four weeks ago, the DOJ issued a cease and desist letter demanding that the nonprofit group drop representation of their current clients and shut down their asylum-advisory program. The DOJ accused NWIRP of breaking a rule that was originally created in order to prevent attorney misconduct and protect people from lawyers or “notarios” who take their money, but ultimately drop their case. (We’ve previously written about “notarios” and other scams that immigrants face.)
Read more