Legal services for unaccompanied migrant children still uncertain after judge orders reinstatement
SAN FRANCISCO — Legal aid clinics that sued the Trump administration after it canceled legal services for migrant children alone in the country say they are still in limbo a day after a federal judge in California ordered the reinstatement of direct legal assistance.
U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín of San Francisco ruled late Tuesday in a lawsuit filed by legal aid groups after the Department of Health and Human Services and its Office of Refugee Resettlement on March 21 terminated a contract with the Acacia Center for Justice.
She wrote that advocates raised legitimate questions about whether the U.S. violated a 2008 anti-trafficking law when it canceled funding for direct legal representation without ensuring the provision of counsel prior to the cancellation, warranting a return to the status quo while the case continues. The order took effect Wednesday and runs 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,' she wrote.
But aid providers said Wednesday they are not sure if they can expect federal dollars to begin flowing again.
The Acacia center provides legal services for unaccompanied migrant children under 18 through a network of legal aid groups that subcontract with the center. Eleven subcontractor groups sued, saying that 26,000 children were at risk of losing their attorneys and that the government has an obligation to come up with a plan for transferring pending cases.
Acacia is not a party to the lawsuit, but Bilal Askaryar, a spokesperson, said Wednesday that it has received no notice from the government on what to do next.
'We're still stuck in this impossible situation where the attorneys that work with these vulnerable kids have no clarity,' he said.
Alvaro M. Huerta, an attorney with the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, said they are waiting to hear from the government on how it intends to comply with the order. Meanwhile, legal aid providers do not know if they can rehire staff or take on new clients, he said.
'Many organizations continue to represent children in court given their ethical and professional obligations, even without getting government funding to do so,' he said.
The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 created special protections for migrant children who cannot navigate a complex immigration system on their own. Plaintiffs said some of their clients are too young to speak and others are too traumatized and do not know English.
The law requires the government to ensure 'to the greatest extent practicable' that all children entering the country alone have legal counsel to represent them in proceedings and to 'protect them from mistreatment, exploitation, and trafficking.'
Attorneys for the government say that taxpayers have no obligation to pay the cost of direct legal aid to migrant children at a time when the government is trying to save money. They also said district courts have no jurisdiction over a contract termination that would have expired at the end of March.
Acacia is still under contract with the government to provide legal orientations, including 'know your rights' clinics, which Jonathan Ross with the U.S. Department of Justice said at a court hearing Tuesday is legally required.
'They're still free to provide those services on a pro bono basis,' he said of the legal aid clinics.
But Karen Tumlin with the Justice Action Center said at the same hearing that the administration cannot simply zero out funding without providing direction on who will help these children when Congress has appropriated money for the care of unaccompanied minors.
'They need to make sure to the greatest extent practicable that there is a plan,' she said.
The temporary order by Martínez-Olguín, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, prohibits the government from withdrawing services or funds Congress had appropriated for such children.
The legal services contract, which was set to expire unless renewed in March, was worth $200 million, which is a fraction of the overall $5 billion Congress appropriated for overall unaccompanied migrant children services, including housing or shelter.
The Department of Health and Human Services said in an email it does not comment on ongoing litigation.
This is the third legal setback in less than a week for the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, though all may prove temporary as the lawsuits advance.
On Friday, a federal judge in Boston said people with final deportation orders must have a 'meaningful opportunity ' to argue against being sent to a country other than their own. On Monday, another federal judge in San Francisco put on hold plans to end protections for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans. __ This story has been updated to clarify that legal aid for minors is a $200 million piece of $5 billion appropriated by Congress to assist unaccompanied children and to correct that Acacia is under a modified contract with the federal government, not a new contract.
Originally Published: April 3, 2025 at 12:12 PM CDT
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
14 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
14 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
15 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.'
