News > Immigration In The United States
Protecting immigrant access to legal help
Posted on May 25 2017
Advocates including the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota (ILCM) are fighting back against the Department of Justice (DOJ) attempt to limit immigrant access to non-profit legal assistance. In April, the DOJ sent a warning letter to the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project (NWIRP) in Seattle, telling the organization to “cease and desist” from assisting immigrants in deportation proceedings unless NWIRP has entered a formal notice of representation with the immigration court.
A brief in support of NWIRP (called an “amicus brief”) was submitted by more than a dozen legal assistance organizations, including ILCM. The amicus brief describes why immigrants need advice and assistance even if lawyers cannot commit to full representation:
“A day in any immigration court in America would be an enlightening experience for most U.S. citizens, including for much of the bar. Respondent after respondent pleads for a continuance to find a lawyer. Shackled detainees ask anyone in a suit for a card. Detainees who have run out of continuances stare blankly at an overworked judge who asks the most basic questions, or they ask for help understanding a form, or they unknowingly provide incomplete responses that seal their fate.”
Immigration courts have no public defenders. Immigrants in deportation proceedings have lawyers only if they can afford them. Non-profit organizations offer some help, but they do not have enough capacity to represent everyone. Even if immigrants have money, they often cannot find a qualified immigration attorney, especially in detention centers that are far from major cities.
In its cease and desist letter to NWIRP, DOJ objected to a situation in which an attorney from NWIRP helped with a motion to reopen drafted on behalf of a woman and her two children. NWIRP did not have an attorney available to take the case for representation, which would take hundreds of hours, and so the attorney instead offered advice and limited help in drafting the motion. The attorney noted this assistance on the court documents. And the woman desperately needed help: she spoke Mam (a Mayan language), waited for months for a credible-fear interview that never happened, and then missed her hearing because of a mistranslation of her hearing notice.
Because full representation on an immigration case is enormously time-consuming, NWIRP, ILCM, and other non-profit legal organizations often provide advice and education, multiplying their effectiveness and assisting many more people than can be helped through representation alone. As noted in the amicus brief,
“Some amici organize workshops to teach general immigration concepts to immigrants or attorneys; some help answer questions on forms such as the I-589 asylum application; some provide templates for petitions, motions, and briefs; and some help draft documents that a pro se litigant will file in immigration court.”
While this assistance is not as helpful as full representation, the amicus brief noted that “the ideal that all persons in immigration proceedings have full-scope legal representation is a far cry from reality.”
These strategies for delivering help to as many immigrants as possible are exactly what the Trump DOJ’s cease-and-desist letter threaten. The interpretation that DOJ sets forth in its letter could prevent tens of thousands of immigrants from getting individualized legal advice and assistance.
Immigration court judges know that this assistance is valuable. The amicus brief quoted former Immigration Judge Eliza Klein:
“Without the assistance of these non-profit organizations, there is a real danger that people with valid asylum claims will not seek relief or may not present their claim in such a way that the judge will understand the validity of the claim. Even when they are able to present their case, if they have had no prior assistance in filling out forms, writing statements and obtaining supporting evidence, the amount of time the court must dedicate to the case (both in questioning the Respondent about unexplored avenues of relevant information and in continuing a case to obtain evidence) is greatly increased. In essence, by preventing these organizations from assisting asylum seekers in preparing their applications, EOIR would deprive asylum applicants of the “full and fair hearing” to which they are entitled.”
Federal District Court Judge Richard Jones (Seattle) found that NWIRP “is likely to succeed on the claims that entitle it to relief,” and that granting a temporary restraining order “is in the public interest.” He issued a nationwide temporary restraining order against the Department of Justice on May 17, ordering that the DOJ not attempt to enforce the cease-and-desist letter against NWIRP, or against any non-profit organizations that provide legal services, while the court considers NWIRP’s request for a preliminary injunction.
For more information, see:
- The Airport Lawyers Who Stood Up to Trump Are Under Attack (The Nation,5/19/17)
- Seattle Judge Rules Justice Department Can’t Limit Legal Assistance to Immigrants (YES! Magazine, 5/18/17)
- Federal Judge Blocks Restriction on Immigrant Legal Help (Honolulu Star Advertiser, 5/17/17)
- Mtn. for Leave to File Amicus (Ex. A – Proposed Amicus Brief w Exhibits)…
- NWIRP Cease and Desist 4-5-17
- 2017-05-17 Order Granting TRO
- NWIRP challenges order from Department o fJustice to cease and desist providing legal assistance to unrepresented individuals in deportation proceedings (NWIRP)