
‘Railroad kids through the system': Immigration court's youngest left to their own devices
Every week, Evelyn Flores travels to government shelters in the Washington, DC, region for story time with migrant children, telling the tale of a cartoon cat learning to navigate a confusing immigration system with the help of his superhero lawyer.
'They don't know what is an attorney, they don't know what is a judge, they are very little,' said Flores, managing paralegal for the children's program at Amica Center for Immigrant Rights. 'We try our best to explain, but it's so difficult.'
Now, these teachable moments may become even more critical if children are forced to face the courtroom alone, without a lawyer.
Amid public outrage over due process afforded to immigrants, or the lack thereof, it's some of the youngest in the immigration court system who may be among those hit the hardest by the Trump administration crackdown and funding cutbacks.
The administration decided in March to terminate a federal contract with Acacia Center for Justice, which manages a network of legal service organizations representing around 26,000 unaccompanied children – some who are infants and too young to speak – in the United States.
'This decision was made without any plan in place to address the 26,000 children with open cases that the government encouraged our network to take on. As a result, these children are now unable to meaningfully participate in their cases and are left in the lurch,' said Shaina Aber, executive director of Acacia Center for Justice.
In just the span of a few weeks, the move has resulted in sweeping staff layoffs and a disruption in legal services that could lead to attorneys withdrawing from cases.
'The federal support is everything,' said Wendy Young, president of Kids in Need of Defense. 'We would probably see more like 90 percent of these kids going through proceedings without counsel.'
At the same time, migrant children are being placed on expedited court dockets as part of efforts to speed up deportations, significantly cutting the time they have to collect evidence and present their case before an immigration judge.
'This is a process that will just railroad kids through the system,' Young said. 'They'll receive an order to be deported from the United States without any access to due process or fundamental fairness.'
Under US law, immigrants don't have a right to counsel at the government's expense, not even children, leaving them to depend on volunteer lawyers or nongovernmental organizations. The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 created special protections for migrant children, including ensuring 'to the greatest extent practicable' that they have counsel to represent them.
The Trump administration has argued in court filings that the federal government has discretion in how it distributes federal funds. 'Although, the money was authorized by Congress, Congress never mandated its spending,' it wrote.
A federal judge has since ordered the administration to temporarily restore funding, but to date, that hasn't happened, according to recipients of those funds.
The Trump administration has said thousands of migrant children who are seeking asylum or other legal status are unaccounted for and is trying to track them down.
'President Trump's committed to doing everything he can to find these kids, but I'm going to admit to you right now that's the toughest job of the three things he wants me to do. That's the toughest part of it,' White House border czar Tom Homan told a special joint session of the Arizona legislature this month.
Experts argue that cutting federal funds for key services runs counter to that effort, taking away the people who are helping them through the immigration system, and that includes reporting to the government.
Flores tells the story of the cartoon cat, known as Fulanito to children 12 years old and under. Fulanito, in Flores' story time, crosses into the United States and eventually goes before an immigration judge, and his attorney helps him secure immigration relief. For teenagers, the group describes the immigration court process through a soccer analogy.
Organizations who work with migrant children often have to be creative to get them to open up. Staffers use coloring books, fidget toys and stress balls.
'We'll often color with children. We'll pull out a page for ourselves and color while we speak with them. It's hard to talk about heavy things while you're just staring at each other in the face,' said Scott Bassett, managing attorney of the children's program at Amica Center for Immigrant Rights.
Young likened her offices to a nursery school. The lesson: how to fight your deportation proceeding.
'We'll have toddlers running all over the place, and my staff is explaining to them, using toys, crayons, chalkboards, what their rights are in the immigration system. And it's both something that's both very poignant, it's very joyful, but there's also a tremendous sense of gravity to it,' Young said.
Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, which also works with unaccompanied children, uses handmade toy sets representing a courtroom for one-on-one legal screenings with kids. Kids in Need of Defense puts on puppet shows.
Ages range, but the importance of immigration proceedings remain the same for all who go before an immigration judge – who ultimately decides if someone stays in the United States or is removed.
'I was in a court last summer where a three-year-old was in proceedings. He played with his toy car in the aisle of the courtroom until he was called, and then a young woman picked him up and brought him to the front of the courtroom,' Young said.
'I can tell you, I knew that child knew something dramatic was about to happen. He started crying. He was inconsolable at that point,' she added.
In a recent court filing submitted as part of the ongoing lawsuit over terminating of funds, the Young Center's child advocates cited 'children as young as five years old sitting at tables by themselves in front of judges.'
'During the days immediately following the termination of funding, Child Advocates observed immigration judges learning for the first time at court hearings that funding for legal representation and friend of court services for unaccompanied children had been terminated,' the filings read.
'Upon arriving at court, children also learned for the first time that they would not have an attorney to represent them. In one court, Young Center Child Advocates observed a 14-year-old girl break down in tears in the court's lobby when she was told that she would not have a lawyer and would need to stand up in court all alone,' it continued.
The Health and Human Services Department's Office of Refugee Resettlement is charged with the care of unaccompanied migrant children until they are released to a sponsor in the United States, such as a relative or family friend.
The agency recently rolled out multiple new policies regarding the release of children to sponsors that make it more difficult for kids to be reunited with their guardians.
Trump officials have argued the additional vetting of sponsors is necessary to ensure the child's safety. But experts describe it as a dramatic shift that is likely to keep children in custody longer.
'ORR has recently imposed a series of draconian sponsor vetting requirements, including restrictive ID requirements, universal fingerprinting and DNA testing,' said Neha Desai, managing director of children's human rights and dignity at the National Center for Youth Law.
'This has made it nearly impossible for children in ORR custody to be released if their sponsor is undocumented or if the sponsor lives with people who are undocumented – even if the child is seeking release to their parent,' she added.
Meanwhile, in some courtrooms, cases are being sped up to be resolved in a matter of weeks.
In a New York courtroom on Monday, an immigration judge presided over a group of seven to 10 unaccompanied minors – ranging from ages 6 to 17 and most without legal representation. They appeared virtually from government custody.
The judge guided the children through the basics of the immigration court process.
'Just because you can be removed doesn't mean you need to be,' Judge Jennifer Durkin told them, emphasizing that their individual stories mattered. She acknowledged the intimidating nature of the proceedings, adding: 'My job is to listen to why you came to the United States.'
The minors, who currently reside in a government-run shelter in Brooklyn, appeared attentive. At moments, the seriousness of the hearing gave way to childhood – one boy let out a few playful giggles during the judge's questioning.
Two children were in the process of reunification with family members. One, a young girl with cerebral palsy who is currently hospitalized, was represented by counsel. Her attorney informed the judge that she was being reunited with her mother.
The six-year-old, the youngest in attendance, was also represented by counsel. His attorney said he was in the process of being reunited with his maternal grandmother.
All the children were scheduled for a second hearing in June or July, giving those without counsel roughly two months to find legal representation.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBS News
21 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."
Yahoo
21 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


American Military News
22 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.'