Background of the Case

The administration’s decision on March 21 to terminate a contract with the Acacia Center for Justice had put at risk the legal representation for approximately 26,000 children under the age of 18.
Eleven subcontractor organizations that worked with Acacia filed a lawsuit, arguing that the federal government had a legal obligation to provide vulnerable minors with legal counsel as mandated by the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008.

Judicial Decision

U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín issued a temporary restraining order on Tuesday, stating that the advocates raised valid concerns regarding the administration’s compliance with the 2008 law. The ruling directs the restoration of legal aid services effective Wednesday, continuing through April 16.

“The Court additionally finds that the continued funding of legal representation for unaccompanied children promotes efficiency and fairness within the immigration system,” Judge Martínez-Olguín wrote in her order.

Legal Context and Implications

The ruling marks the third legal challenge encountered by the Trump administration’s immigration policies in less than a week. Past rulings included a decision requiring individuals with final deportation orders to have a “meaningful opportunity” to contest their removals and another halting the expiration of protections for a significant number of Venezuelan migrants.

The 2008 anti-trafficking law was designed to ensure the protection and legal representation of migrant children navigating a convoluted immigration system. Legal representatives emphasized that some children involved are too young to advocate for themselves or are traumatized and do not speak English.

Government’s Position

In response, officials from the Department of Health and Human Services contended that taxpayers are not obligated to fund direct legal aid at a time of budget cuts. They also asserted that federal courts lack jurisdiction over contract terminations.

Despite this, advocates are not requesting the immediate restoration of the terminated contract but rather a return to the previous funding levels, which totaled $5 billion allocated by Congress for child representation.

“They need to make sure to the greatest extent practicable that there is a plan,” said Karen Tumlin from the Justice Action Center during court proceedings.

Jonathan Ross, representing the U.S. Department of Justice, stated that essential activities under the law are still funded and that legal clinics may continue to provide services without charge.