logo
‘Chaos' Looms For Unaccompanied Kids As Trump Cancels Funding For Their Lawyers

‘Chaos' Looms For Unaccompanied Kids As Trump Cancels Funding For Their Lawyers

Yahoo25-03-2025

The Trump administration is stripping funding for legal representation from tens of thousands of children who are unaccompanied migrants in the United States, a move immigration lawyers warn violates their legal rights and will leave minors vulnerable to abuse.
'Picture yourself thrown into a detention center in a foreign country where you don't speak the language, where you don't understand that country's complex legal system, only to be told that now you must fend for yourself, assert your rights and seek whatever protections that country might offer you,' Jennie Giambastiani, a retired immigration judge, said Tuesday during a call organized by the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights.
'Now picture yourself as a child in that situation,' she added.
Government-funded attorneys changed that dynamic, Giambastiani said, because they worked hard 'to make sure that the children understood the proceedings and could present their claims in court.' Most unaccompanied children can't afford to hire their own legal representation.
Without those lawyers, Giambastiani said separately, the immigration courts would be thrown into 'chaos': 'The judge won't have any sense that this child understands why [they're] there in court.'
The Trump administration has decided to cancel $200 million in annual funding for legal representation for unaccompanied minors, ABC News first reported Friday, citing an internal Trump administration memo. The New York Times matched that report.
According to ABC, the cut ended funding for the recruitment of attorneys to represent migrant children, though it did not cut informational presentations for children that are delivered in detention centers. Notably, the administration had previously issued a stop-work order concerning the same services last month but reversed it a few days later.
Now, the legal representation funding is apparently being slashed altogether.
The Office of Refugee Resettlement, which is housed within the Department of Health and Human Services and is responsible for overseeing the care of unaccompanied migrant children, including in contracted shelters, did not respond to HuffPost's request for comment.
But the federal webpage for the contract now shows that it was 'terminated for convenience' on Friday. And the Acacia Center for Justice, which runs the Unaccompanied Children Program that provides the legal services in question — and which serves 26,000 children through a network of organizations — confirmed the cut in a statement Friday.
'The administration's decision to partially terminate this program flies in the face of decades of work and bipartisan cooperation spent ensuring children who have been trafficked or are at risk of trafficking have child-friendly legal representatives protecting their legal rights and interests,' the group said.
By Monday, over 100 organizations involved in Acacia's Unaccompanied Children Program signed onto a statement opposing the cut.
'Abandoning [children] while fast-tracking their deportation cases will lead to mass due process violations and wrongful denials of protection,' Christine Lin, director of training and technical assistance at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, said in the statement.
'In cases with life-or-death stakes, this will mean children being deported to countries where they face grave harm. We urge the administration to reverse this decision and immediately restore legal services for unaccompanied children.'
'This brazen, heartless act endangers children's lives,' said Ashley Harrington, managing attorney of the children's program at Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network, or RMIAN.
'RMIAN represents child survivors of trafficking, abuse and trauma, including children as young as 2 years old,' Harrington said. 'Children cannot be expected to navigate the harsh and complicated immigration legal system without an attorney. This administration wants to force us to abandon them to face ICE and the immigration courts alone. But we will continue to stand in solidarity with these children and fight to protect their rights to legal representation.'
The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act requires the government to provide legal representation for minors to the 'greatest extent practicable,' the Times noted. The paper cited American Immigration Council data showing that children appear in immigration court 95% of the time when represented by an attorney, as opposed to 33% of the time without one. Funding for the legal representation for unaccompanied minors had been continuously renewed since 2005, El Pais noted.
Fifty-seven percent of unaccompanied children with pending immigration cases had legal counsel in 2024, according to the Acacia Center for Justice. And representation makes a major difference: Unaccompanied children with legal representation at some point during their cases were more than seven times as likely to receive an outcome that let them stay in the United States, a 2021 Vera Institute of Justice report found.
The cuts are just one of several steps the Trump administration has taken targeting undocumented youth.
The administration now also allows the Office for Refugee Resettlement to share information about children's sponsors' immigration status with law enforcement, Reuters reported — raising concerns that family members could be discouraged from sponsoring relatives due to fears over deportation.
The cuts to legal defense funding for immigrant children are all the more shocking in light of President Donald Trump's fixation on 325,000 migrant children that he has asserted are 'slaves, sex slaves or dead.' The false claim is apparently in reference to a 2024 report that found that 32,000 unaccompanied migrant children failed to appear for immigration court hearings between fiscal years 2019 and 2023; the same report counted 291,000 children to whom Immigration and Customs Enforcement had not yet served notices to appear for court dates.
Setting aside that the time period covered both the Trump and Biden administrations, these children were not presumed 'lost,' let alone trafficked. Rather, those figures represent more of a 'paperwork issue,' Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, now a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, told the BBC in November.
'When you hear the phrase 'missing,' you think that there is a child that someone is trying to find and can't,' he said. 'That's not the case here. The government has not made any effort to find these children.'
Still, migrant children are known to be vulnerable to both sexual abuse and labor exploitation. And the Trump administration's decision to strip migrant children of their legal representation makes them more susceptible to such harm, advocates say.
'I've seen how, without a legal advocate representing their interests, unaccompanied children can really get lost,' Nick Cuneo, a doctor who has worked with unaccompanied children, said on the Amica call.
'Legal representatives are often on the frontline of kids disclosing what's happening to them,' he added. 'As we know, kids without parental figures or close guardians can be subject to predation, and there have been reports of labor trafficking and so forth in the United States with this population in particular that I have seen bear out in anecdotes. Often, attorneys are the ones who are able to pick up on when a child is being mistreated or abused.'
'It's hard to rationalize any way that makes sense,' Cuneo said, referring to the administration's decision to remove an 'extra layer of protection' for unaccompanied children.
Jesús Güereca, a managing attorney at Estrella del Paso in El Paso, Texas, said on the call that migrant children represented by attorneys 'have that trust in us, so they're able to tell us [about things that are happening to them], and we're able to do something about that.'
'Inside of a shelter, our primary goal is to keep the children safe,' Güereca said. 'That's what this funding does. It helps keep the children safe. We're an extra set of eyes, an extra set of ears, an extra set of adults that care about these children.'
'Without this funding, that's going away.'
Columbia Student Sought By ICE Sues Trump Over Deportation Efforts
Gay Venezuelan Makeup Artist Among Hundreds Deported Without Due Process
U.S. Government Cannot Deport Georgetown Scholar Until Court Rules, Judge Orders
A Timeline Of The Legal Wrangling And Deportation Flights After Trump Invoked The Alien Enemies Act
Trump Administration Deports Hundreds Of Immigrants Even As A Judge Orders Their Removals Be Stopped

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump and Hegseth to visit Fort Bragg as they send troops to Los Angeles
Trump and Hegseth to visit Fort Bragg as they send troops to Los Angeles

CBS News

time12 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Trump and Hegseth to visit Fort Bragg as they send troops to Los Angeles

Washington — President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are visiting Fort Bragg, the nation's largest military installation, on Tuesday, after sending the National Guard and U.S. Marines to respond to protests in Los Angeles. Members of the Marine Corps arrived in the greater Los Angeles area Tuesday, a defense official told CBS News, after the military activated about 700 active-duty Marines Monday. The Pentagon said the Marines would "seamlessly integrate" with National Guard troops to protect "federal personnel and federal property." There are 2,100 members of the California National Guard now on location in the greater Los Angeles area, operating in Los Angeles, Paramount and Compton. The president is expected to speak at Fort Bragg in North Carolina around 4 p.m. Hegseth is heading to the military base after testifying on Capitol Hill. "Will be going to Fort Bragg today. Big speech, amazing crowd! See you later!!!" Mr. Trump wrote on Truth Social Tuesday morning. The president claimed Tuesday morning that Los Angeles would be "would be burning to the ground right now," if not for his actions to federalize the National Guard. A memorandum the president signed Saturday said the troops are authorized to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials and other federal law enforcement officials. He invoked Title 10, the U.S. code governing use of the armed forces, allowing the National Guard to come into LA in a supporting role. On Monday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom sued the president and Hegseth over the decision to deploy the National Guard to the state against Newsom's wishes. Newsom argued that Title 10 "has been invoked on its own only once before and for highly unusual circumstances not presented here." He pointed to the text of the U.S. code, which states that when the president calls a state's National Guard into federal service under Title 10, "those orders 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.'" Hegseth, Newsom maintained, "unlawfully bypassed the Governor of California, issuing an order that by statute must go through him." "At no point in the past three days has there been a rebellion or an insurrection," the lawsuit reads. "Nor have these protests risen to the level of protests or riots that Los Angeles and other major cities have seen at points in the past, including in recent years."

CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail
CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail

Yahoo

time12 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail

At second-annual CartCon conference in Napa Valley, CA, the tone was electric with anticipation but also laced with urgency. Billed as a summit for the company's expansive ecosystem of brands, vendors and strategists, the event served as both a product showcase and a pressure valve. Nowhere was that tension more visible than during one of the conference's hardest-hitting panels, a deep dive into the complexities of tariff policy and its ripple effects on global sourcing, consumer pricing and retail resilience. The panel consisted of three voices with rare insight into the collision of policy and commerce: Chris Smith, president of Summit Global Strategies; Tim Manning, former White House supply chain coordinator under President Joe Biden; and Nick Stachel, logistics strategy adviser at Izba Consulting. What followed was not a high-level overview, but a granular exploration of the legal, political and operational forces shaping how, and where, products are made, moved and sold. From globalization to geo-economics Smith opened the discussion by tracing the historical arc of U.S. trade policy. For decades following World War II, American trade strategy revolved around multilateralism. The U.S. saw global trade not just as an economic imperative but as a geopolitical tool, creating allies, raising standards of living and preventing conflict. But in 2016, that long-standing consensus fractured. The bipartisan abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership signaled a sharp pivot. As Smith explained, the political center collapsed under the weight of the 'China Shock,' a term describing the decimation of American manufacturing towns due to offshoring. Smith described President Donald Trump's tariff policy as a psychological reset. Before Trump, U.S. tariffs averaged around 2%. Within months, they jumped to 18% in key categories. This wasn't just an economic strategy, it was anchoring. 'It's like burger sizes,' Smith said, relating back to Wendy's psychological marketing strategies. 'Before Trump, we had singles and doubles. Now the triple is on the menu, and everything else looks small by comparison.' Tariffs, he added, have become Trump's 'cat toy' — a provocative distraction wielded without consistent strategy. Even if future administrations soften tariff policy, Smith warned, the structure of global trade has already shifted. Retailers and manufacturers alike are building permanent workarounds. Inflation, particularly in consumer goods, is the slow-burning consequence. While Smith provided the philosophical backdrop, Manning broke down the legal tools underpinning today's tariff landscape. The real disruption, Manning emphasized, has come through the use, and misuse, of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Originally designed as a tool for national security sanctions, IEEPA has been repurposed by the Trump administration to enact sweeping tariffs with little congressional oversight. Manning described the legal and logistical chaos for businesses from these tactics. In just six weeks, the Trump administration issued 17 executive orders using IEEPA authority, stripping trade policy of its usual predictability and process. For businesses, this has been catastrophic. Sourcing strategies built over years have unraveled in days. 'We're in a volatile environment,' Manning said. The cost of doing business now includes factoring in the potential for abrupt, unexplained swings in tariff exposure. Long-term investments have become high-risk bets, and in many cases, they're simply not being made. On-the-ground retail strategy Bringing the policy talk down to the warehouse floor, Stachel outlined how brands are actually coping with this new reality. In the short term, some are fast-tracking inventory from China before new tariffs hit, relying on expedited ocean freight and cross-docking at West Coast ports to minimize delays and avoid customs bottlenecks. Others are making subtler moves — like holding prices steady on high-visibility products – say, a gaming console – while raising prices on accessories and add-ons to recoup margin. Stachel noted that many brands have moved beyond the now-familiar 'China Plus One' strategy, opting instead for a 'China Plus Three' approach. They are spreading risk across Vietnam, India and Mexico, often working with global manufacturing giants like Foxconn that can seamlessly shift production across borders without retooling or retraining labor. In essence, brands are outsourcing flexibility itself. For those planning beyond the current election cycle, geographic diversification is no longer enough. Brands are factoring in port access, transportation infrastructure, exposure to natural disasters and local workforce stability. Some are eyeing countries like Morocco, Colombia and Thailand as next-generation sourcing hubs. Nearshoring to Mexico has particular appeal, not just because of its proximity to U.S. consumers, but because of the downstream economic benefits. 'We're still benefiting from a cross border perspective, from a transportation trucking perspective, from a warehousing perspective, as these border towns are growing, the economies in the small border towns are growing as well,' said Stachel. These sourcing shifts are backed by hard data prepared by Stachel. According to a comparative analysis of emerging manufacturing markets, countries like Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines are increasingly viable alternatives to China, not only in terms of labor costs but also port infrastructure and U.S.-bound vessel frequency. Vietnam, for instance, operates nearly 50 seaports, including Ho Chi Minh City and Hai Phong, both of which have multiple sailings to the U.S. each week. Indonesia boasts over 100 ports, including Tanjung Priok in Jakarta. Even Cambodia, though limited in scale, has weekly direct sailings from both Phnom Penh and Sihanoukville. These figures underscore the importance of transportation fluidity and market access in sourcing decisions. As Stachel emphasized, brands are no longer optimizing solely for cost, they're optimizing for resilience. Both Smith and Manning cautioned that the real reckoning may be ahead. While tariff impacts are already being priced in at the retail level, the broader inflationary wave has yet to crest. Smith called inflation the 'other shoe,' likely to drop later this summer as new tariffs pass through the supply chain and collide with already fragile consumer sentiment. Uncertainty, they agreed, has become the greatest tax of all. With businesses unable to predict future policy, many are frozen. Manning advised attendees to monitor key macroeconomic signals, including treasury bond activity, consumer confidence indices and safety stock drawdowns. Executive orders posted on he added, are the best early indicators of a sudden policy shift. What retailers are saying – and doing The audience at CartCon also offered candid perspectives. Through real-time polling, attendees offered a rare window into how brands are navigating the chaos. Asked what recent policy had most affected their supply chains, 68% cited China tariffs, with an additional 24% naming de minimis enforcement, or stricter checks on duty-free, low-value imports. In a sign of just how volatile the environment has become, 64% said they revisit their sourcing strategies quarterly. And nearly half, 47%, have responded by raising prices. Twenty-nine percent have changed sourcing countries, while 18% are simply eating the cost. Looking ahead, most brands aren't betting on reshoring. Asked if they expect to source more from the U.S. in five years, 70% said their sourcing would remain about the same, and 30% expected an increase. No one expected to source less. It was a striking rebuke of the idea that domestic manufacturing is due for a renaissance, at least for the retail segment. Tariffs and uncertainty are already impacting consumer demand. Thirty percent of respondents said they expect a consumer slowdown by Q4 2025, while 45% said they're already feeling one. And yet, the vast majority, 82%, said they are not cutting marketing budgets in response. In today's environment, visibility is survival. In a forward-looking poll, 81% of respondents said online shopping will be the dominant channel in the next decade, compared to just 6% for stores. Even more striking, 75% believe direct-to-consumer models can still succeed, suggesting that agility, not abandonment, is the key to survival. The post CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail appeared first on FreightWaves. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

700 Marines deployed to Los Angeles amid major riots
700 Marines deployed to Los Angeles amid major riots

American Military News

time13 minutes ago

  • American Military News

700 Marines deployed to Los Angeles amid major riots

President Donald Trump's administration deployed 700 Marines to Los Angeles and the surrounding area on Monday in response to the city's massive riots against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations. In a Monday press release, U.S. Northern Command announced that it had activated the Marine infantry battalion that the Trump administration 'placed in an alert status over the weekend.' 'Approximately 700 Marines with 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, 1st Marine Division will seamlessly integrate with the Title 10 forces under Task Force 51 who are protecting federal personnel and federal property in the greater Los Angeles area,' U.S. Northern Command stated. 'The activation of the Marines is intended to provide Task Force 51 with adequate numbers of forces to provide continuous coverage of the area in support of the lead federal agency.' According to the press release, Task Force 51 includes 700 active-duty Marines and roughly 2,100 National Guardsmen in Title 10 status. Northern Command noted that members of Task Force 51 have been trained in 'de-escalation, crowd control, and standing rules for the use of force.' 'Due to increased threats to federal law enforcement officers and federal buildings, approximately 700 active-duty U.S. Marines from Camp Pendleton are being deployed to Los Angeles to restore order,' Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth wrote in a statement on X, formerly Twitter. 'We have an obligation to defend federal law enforcement officers – even if Gavin Newsom will not.' READ MORE: Videos: 500 Marines ready to deploy to Los Angeles amid major riots Northern Command confirmed in the press release that there were roughly 1,700 soldiers from the 79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Los Angeles and the surrounding area as of Monday. On Monday evening, Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Sean Parnell tweeted, 'At the order of the President, the Department of Defense is mobilizing an additional 2,000 California National Guard to be called into federal service to support ICE & to enable federal law-enforcement officers to safely conduct their duties.' According to The Associated Press, Trump's authorization for the Department of Defense to deploy an additional 2,000 National Guardsmen in response to the anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles brings the total number of National Guardsmen mobilized by the federal government in response to the riots to over 4,100. In a Tuesday morning statement on Truth Social, Trump said, 'If I didn't 'SEND IN THE TROOPS' to Los Angeles the last three nights, that once beautiful and great City would be burning to the ground right now, much like 25,000 houses burned to the ground in L.A. do to an incompetent Governor and Mayor.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store