Trump-Appointed Judge Rules Administration Acted Unlawfully in Halting Immigration Protections for Abused Youth

In a significant rebuke to the Trump administration’s immigration policies, a federal judge has ordered the government to resume processing protection requests for young immigrants who have suffered abuse or neglect. The Wednesday ruling marks another instance where federal courts have found the administration’s approach to immigration enforcement legally deficient.

What happened

U.S. District Judge Eric Komitee, a Trump appointee to New York’s Eastern District, issued a 49-page order requiring the administration to restart the Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Deferred Action (SIJS-DA) program. The program provides crucial deportation protections for young people who have been abused, neglected, or abandoned by at least one parent.

The Trump administration quietly stopped processing these protection requests in April 2025, well before publicly announcing a policy change in June. This two-month gap proved critical to the court’s finding of unlawful conduct.

The legal issues

Judge Komitee found multiple legal violations in the administration’s actions. The government failed to adequately consider how reversing the policy would affect vulnerable young people, their employers, and state governments. More damning, the administration essentially admitted to acting outside its own procedures during that April-to-June period.

“The government does not dispute that, for at least a two-month period, it did not follow its own internal procedures concerning deferred action for SIJS recipients,” Komitee wrote. “In other words, it does not dispute that it acted unlawfully.”

The judge also rejected the administration’s argument that young immigrants had no legally protected interest in applying for deferred action, even if the government retained discretion to deny applications. He found that losing the opportunity to pursue an immigration benefit constitutes a recognizable injury, even when final approval remains discretionary.

Understanding SIJS

The Special Immigrant Juvenile classification was created in 1990 to help foreign-born children living in the United States who have been mistreated by parents and for whom returning to their home country is not in their best interest. The designation opens a pathway to permanent residency.

However, there’s an annual cap on available visas, creating significant backlogs. In response to these delays during the Biden administration, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services created the deferred action program in 2022, which authorized temporary deportation protections while recipients waited for their permanent visas.

The plaintiffs’ case

Nine SIJS recipients and two youth immigration advocacy organizations brought the class action lawsuit, including five young New Yorkers. They argued the administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to provide proper notice and consideration before changing the policy.

Rachel Leya Davidson, counsel for the plaintiffs and director of the End SIJS Backlog coalition at the National Immigration Project, called the order a significant first step and a rebuke of the government’s unlawful actions.

Real-world impact

The ruling has immediate consequences for thousands of young people across the country. Those with approved SIJS status now face uncertainty about their immigration future. Some are already in removal proceedings, facing the looming threat of deportation to countries where they suffered abuse.

One plaintiff highlighted the personal stakes: a 21-year-old from Mali whose SIJ petition was approved in July was initially jubilant reading the court’s order, as it appeared the government would now consider his deferred action application.

What comes next

This order is not the final word. Judge Komitee will continue considering other aspects of the case, and the Trump administration could appeal the decision. The Department of Justice declined to comment on the ruling.

The case fits into a broader pattern of federal courts pushing back against Trump administration immigration policies this year. Judges have blocked various actions, from asylum bans to birthright citizenship changes, often finding that the administration failed to follow proper legal procedures or exceeded its authority.

The bigger picture

This ruling raises important questions about executive power and administrative law. While presidents have broad authority over immigration policy, they must still follow legal procedures and consider the impact of their decisions on affected populations.

The fact that a Trump-appointed judge ruled against the administration underscores that these cases are decided on legal merits rather than partisan lines. Judge Komitee’s careful analysis focused on procedural requirements and the Administrative Procedure Act, fundamental principles that apply regardless of which party controls the White House.

For the thousands of young people who have already endured trauma in their home countries and sought protection in the United States, the ruling offers at least temporary relief. Whether that protection becomes permanent will depend on how the litigation proceeds and whether the administration appeals.

The case also highlights ongoing tensions between the executive and judicial branches over immigration policy. As courts continue to scrutinize administration actions, the rule of law remains a critical check on executive power, even when that power is exercised in the name of immigration enforcement.

A copy of the decision is available here.

If you need help with SIJS, then contact us today at (405) 616-5999.