(CN) — Immigrant rights groups are suing the federal government to restore legal aid funding, arguing that a recent spending freeze will leave tens of thousands of unaccompanied children to face immigration court by themselves.
The lawsuit, filed Wednesday against the United States Department of Health and Human Services, the Office of Refugee Resettlement and the Department of the Interior, seeks to restore abruptly cut funds that allowed nonprofit groups to provide legal representation to migrant children navigating the complex U.S. immigration system.
The plaintiffs, including organizations like the Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto, Immigrant Defenders Law Center, and the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, contend that the Trump administration’s actions violate federal law and put children at immediate risk.
On Friday, the Interior Department issued a notice terminating contract line items that funded legal services for unaccompanied children. The order instructed the groups to “immediately stop work” on ongoing representations, despite having congressionally appropriated funds available through Sept. 30, 2027.
The lawsuit highlights the extreme vulnerability of these children, with the groups citing a stark example from a previous case where a 1-year-old named Johan appeared in Phoenix Immigration Court alone, with nothing but a bottle of milk and a purple ball. The presiding judge remarked, “I don’t know who you would explain it to, unless you think that a 1-year-old could learn immigration law.”
According to the groups, approximately 26,000 children are now at risk of losing legal representation. Many of these children arrive in the United States without parents or legal guardians, often unable to speak English and lacking the resources to hire an attorney.
The groups argue that the funding termination violates the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which mandates that the government “shall ensure, to the greatest extent practicable,” that unaccompanied children receive legal counsel.
The immigrant rights groups assert that the funding cut is particularly egregious given that Congress appropriated more than $5 billion for fiscal year 2024 to deliver services to unaccompanied children, including funding for legal representation.
“By subverting Congress’s funding of counsel for unaccompanied children, Defendants ensure more children will remain separated from their families, fewer trafficking victims will be identified and protected, and more children will be at risk of being trafficked in the future,” the groups write in their complaint.
They point out severe practical consequences for the nonprofit organizations. Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto has been forced to stop taking on new unaccompanied children clients and may have to drop existing clients.
The complaint includes three primary claims under the Administrative Procedure Act: That the funding termination is not in accordance with law, violates the Accardi Doctrine by failing to adhere to the government’s own policies, and is arbitrary and capricious.
The groups are seeking a court order to declare the defendants’ actions a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, require the continuation of funding for legal representation, and issue a nationwide injunction preventing cuts to funding for legal counsel for unaccompanied children.
The legal challenge also has significant political support. Earlier this month, a coalition of 32 U.S. senators wrote a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum demanding continuation of legal services for unaccompanied children. Thirty-nine U.S. representatives have also pressed the administration to ensure full legal representation for the migrants.
The lawsuit comes amid broader concerns that the Trump administration has repeatedly sought to circumvent congressionally approved funding decisions. The legal aid cuts mirror other recent actions, such as the administration’s redirection of funds meant for refugee resettlement programs and its refusal to allocate certain foreign aid packages despite bipartisan approval.