Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Unaccompanied Children topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee rejects measures to preserve government-funded counsel for unaccompanied children
Summary
Members proposed amendments to preserve or require government-appointed counsel for unaccompanied children; supporters said representation is essential for fairness and that children are nearly 100 times less likely to obtain relief without counsel; the committee declined several of these amendments after germaneness and roll-call rulings.
During the markup members debated language that would preserve or require government-funded legal representation for unaccompanied children in immigration proceedings. Rep. Lofgren and others introduced proposals that would require the government to appoint counsel or preserve existing Office of Refugee Resettlement legal-services arrangements; proponents described court dockets of very young children in front of judges and cited data showing unaccompanied children with counsel are far more likely to obtain relief.
Opponents raised germaneness objections to earlier drafts and argued that NGOs and pro bono organizations already provide services and that government funds to many legal-service providers would continue in practice. The chair and other Republicans emphasized operational goals—reducing flows and codifying policies to prevent trafficking and exploitation—and said Congress should not obligate the Treasury to pay for counsel in the fashion proposed. Narrower redrafts were considered but ultimately the committee did not adopt the versions that would statutorily require government-funded appointed counsel.
Members from both sides described vivid courtroom scenes and the human consequences of representation choices; the debate ended without preserving the more expansive statutory funding language in the reported substitute.
