It is a sight that feels fundamentally wrong when you first see it. Imagine a courtroom bench, the kind built for grown adults, where a toddler is sitting. Their legs don't reach the floor. They might be clutching a stuffed animal or coloring in a book while a judge in black robes peers down from a high-up mahogany desk. This isn't some weird social experiment. It’s a Tuesday in a U.S. immigration court. Are children representing themselves in immigration court? Technically, yes. Thousands of them. And no, they don't have a right to a court-appointed lawyer.
The Sixth Amendment ensures you get a lawyer if you're accused of a crime. If you can’t afford one, the government gives you one. But immigration cases are civil, not criminal. That tiny distinction creates a massive legal loophole where kids as young as two or three years old are expected to navigate a complex legal maze alone.
It's pretty jarring. Honestly, even for seasoned lawyers, the "Pro Se" (representing oneself) docket is a nightmare to watch. You have children who haven't mastered basic long division being asked about "credible fear" and "asylum eligibility."
The Shocking Lack of Legal Counsel
The numbers are pretty bleak. According to data from TRAC (Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse) at Syracuse University, thousands of unaccompanied minors have navigated the system without a lawyer. When a child has an attorney, their chances of being allowed to stay in the U.S. skyrocket. Without one? They are almost certainly going to be deported. It’s basically a math problem with human lives as the variables.
Statistically, unrepresented children are ordered deported in about 90% of cases. When they have a lawyer, that number flips significantly. Lawyers can spot things a kid can’t. They find the T-Visas for trafficking victims or Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) for kids who’ve been abandoned. A seven-year-old isn't going to know what SIJS is. They just know they're scared of the person in the robe.
Why Doesn't the Government Just Provide Lawyers?
Money and politics. That’s the short answer.
There have been dozens of lawsuits. In J.E.F.M. v. Lynch, advocates tried to argue that the Due Process Clause of the Constitution should require the government to provide counsel for kids. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals eventually turned them down, basically saying it wasn't the right time or place for that specific legal challenge.
Some argue that providing lawyers would "clog up" the system even more. They think it would encourage more people to come. Others, like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the American Immigration Council, argue that the current system is a mockery of justice. How can you have a fair trial when one side is the Department of Homeland Security—represented by a professional prosecutor—and the other side is a kid who still loses their baby teeth?
📖 Related: Typhoon Tip and the Largest Hurricane on Record: Why Size Actually Matters
The "Toddler Court" Controversy
A few years ago, a senior immigration judge named Jack Weil made waves during a deposition. He claimed he had taught immigration law to three-year-olds and four-year-olds. He insisted they could understand the concepts.
"I’ve taught immigration law to three-year-olds and four-year-olds. It takes a lot of time. It takes a lot of patience. They get it. It’s not the most efficient way to do it, but it can be done." — Jack Weil, Assistant Chief Immigration Judge (from a 2016 deposition).
Most child psychologists completely disagree. A child’s brain isn't wired for abstract legal theory. They don't understand "admissibility" or "statutory bars." They understand "Mom is gone" or "The bad man in my village had a gun."
What Happens Inside the Courtroom?
It’s often very quiet. Except for the occasional crying.
The judge will ask the child their name. They ask if they understand why they are there. Often, there’s a translator involved, which adds another layer of confusion. Imagine being five years old, speaking a K’iche’ dialect from rural Guatemala, and trying to communicate through a Spanish-to-English translator about why you ran away from home.
The "prosecutor" (the government attorney) is there to represent the interests of the United States. Their job is to uphold the law, which usually means arguing for removal. They aren't the "bad guy" in a movie sense—they’re just doing their job—but the power imbalance is staggering.
Are children representing themselves in immigration court by choice? Never. It’s a matter of resources. Pro-bono organizations like KIND (Kids in Need of Defense) and Young Center for Immigrant Children's Rights do incredible work, but they are overwhelmed. They can’t take every case. There are simply too many kids and not enough lawyers willing or able to work for free.
👉 See also: Melissa Calhoun Satellite High Teacher Dismissal: What Really Happened
The Mental Toll on Minors
The trauma isn't just about the deportation order. It’s the process itself.
Public speaking is the number one fear for most adults. Now, add a foreign language, a high-stakes environment where your entire future is on the line, and the fact that you might be sitting in a room full of strangers. Many of these kids are already dealing with PTSD from the journey to the border or the violence they fled.
The court isn't a "child-friendly" space. While some judges try to be gentle, the rules of evidence and the "adversarial" nature of the system remain. It’s a cold process.
Real Examples of the Legal Hurdle
Consider a hypothetical—but very common—scenario. A 12-year-old boy from El Salvador flees gang recruitment. He arrives at the border, is processed, and released to a distant uncle in Maryland. He gets a "Notice to Appear."
- He shows up at the Baltimore immigration court.
- The judge asks him for his "pleadings."
- He has no idea what that means.
- The judge gives him a "continuance" to find a lawyer.
- He calls 20 different non-profits. They all say they are full.
- He goes back to court three months later. Still no lawyer.
- The judge eventually has to move the case forward.
At this point, the boy has to testify. He has to explain, under oath, exactly what happened to him. If he misses a detail—if his story in court is slightly different than what he told a Border Patrol agent three months ago while he was dehydrated and terrified—the government can use that "inconsistency" to claim he is lying. An attorney would have prepped him. An attorney would have gathered police reports from El Salvador. Without one, he's just a kid who looks like he’s changing his story.
Current Policy Shifts and the 2026 Landscape
As of 2026, the debate hasn't cooled down. Different administrations have tried different "pilot programs" to provide counsel, but there is still no federal mandate. Some states, like California and New York, have put up their own money to fund lawyers for these kids. It creates a "zip code justice" system. If you are a child in Los Angeles, you might get a lawyer. If you are a child in a rural Georgia court, you are likely on your own.
The EOIR (Executive Office for Immigration Review) has tried to implement "juvenile dockets" to group these cases together, but it doesn't change the fundamental lack of counsel. It just makes the visual of children representing themselves even more concentrated.
✨ Don't miss: Wisconsin Judicial Elections 2025: Why This Race Broke Every Record
Myths vs. Reality
People often think these kids have "social workers" who act as their lawyers. They don't. While some might have a "Child Advocate" from a non-profit, that person isn't a legal representative. They can't file motions or argue the law.
Another myth is that the judges are there to help the child. While judges are supposed to be impartial, they cannot be the child's advocate. They can’t give legal advice. They can’t say, "Hey, you should really mention that your uncle was a police officer, because that might help your case." If they did, they’d be violating their role as an independent arbiter.
Actionable Steps and Resources
If you care about this issue or are trying to help someone in this situation, you have to be proactive. The system will not hand you a solution.
- Look for Pro-Bono lists immediately: The EOIR website maintains a list of free or low-cost legal service providers by state. Do not wait until the week of the hearing.
- Contact KIND (Kids in Need of Defense): They are the gold standard for representing unaccompanied minors. Even if they can't take the case, they often have resources or referrals.
- Understand "SIJS": If a child has been abused, neglected, or abandoned by one or both parents, they might be eligible for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status. This is a powerful path to a Green Card, but it requires a state court order before the child turns 18 (or 21 in some states).
- Request a Continuance: If you show up to court without a lawyer, the child (or their guardian) should clearly ask the judge for a "continuance to seek counsel." Most judges will grant this at least once or twice.
- Prepare Documentation: If a lawyer isn't available, help the child gather every piece of paper possible—school records, birth certificates, and any evidence of danger in their home country.
The reality of children representing themselves in immigration court remains one of the most controversial aspects of the American legal system. It's a system where the rules of civil procedure collide with the vulnerability of childhood. Until the law changes to mandate court-appointed counsel for minors, the burden will continue to fall on thin-stretched non-profits and the children themselves to prove they deserve to stay.
Next Steps for Advocacy and Assistance
If you are looking to support these children, consider volunteering as a Child Advocate through the Young Center. You don't need to be a lawyer; you just need to be a consistent adult presence for a child navigating the system. For those in need of immediate legal help, use the EOIR Pro Bono Portal to find licensed practitioners in your specific jurisdiction. Navigating this alone is nearly impossible, and securing a lawyer is the single most important factor in whether a child wins their case or is sent back to the conditions they fled.