SAN FRANCISCO — A coalition of California legal aid organizations filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday challenging what they call an unlawful Trump administration policy that bars abused, neglected and abandoned immigrant children from seeking fee waivers when applying for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, arguing the policy places one of the nation’s most vulnerable populations at risk of losing humanitarian protections permanently.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, contends that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services exceeded its authority by declaring that the new $250 filing fee for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, or SIJS, can never be waived, despite Congress declining to include such a prohibition when it enacted the fee last year. The plaintiffs argue the policy violates the Administrative Procedure Act because it is arbitrary and capricious and because the agency imposed the ban without the notice-and-comment rulemaking required for substantive regulations.
The suit was brought by the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and Legal Services for Children, represented by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area and CHIRLA attorneys.
According to the complaint, Special Immigrant Juvenile Status was created by Congress more than three decades ago to provide a pathway to lawful permanent residence for immigrant children who have been abused, neglected or abandoned by one or both parents. For more than 30 years, applicants were exempt from filing fees before Congress imposed a $250 application fee through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in 2025.
The plaintiffs argue Congress intentionally stopped short of prohibiting fee waivers for SIJS applicants even while explicitly banning waivers for numerous other immigration fees enacted in the same legislation.
According to the complaint, “Congress expressly prohibited fee waivers in numerous other immigration-fee provisions enacted in H.R. 1, as codified in neighboring provisions.” It continues, “Congress’s deliberate prohibitions of fee waivers in nearly a dozen other immigration-fee provisions contained in the same legislation passed at the same time as § 1805 foreclose Defendants’ asserted basis for categorically denying fee waivers to SIJS petitioners.”
Instead, the lawsuit alleges USCIS created its own categorical prohibition despite acknowledging the statute itself contains no such language.
The complaint states that “USCIS’s Fee Notice acknowledges that § 1805 lacks a no-waiver provision but, without any reasoned explanation or consideration of relevant interests, nevertheless declares that H.R. 1 prohibits waivers for the SIJS application fee.” It further alleges that the agency “failed to follow the notice-and-comment rulemaking procedure required by the APA for binding, substantive rules such as the one at issue here.”
The organizations argue the consequences extend far beyond a filing fee.
Many children eligible for SIJS cannot legally work, have no financial support from parents or guardians and often rely on nonprofit organizations for legal assistance. Because applicants must file before turning 21, delays caused by inability to pay can permanently eliminate eligibility for humanitarian protection.
According to the complaint, “Many SIJS-eligible children have no lawful means of earning income, no parent or family whose resources they can draw on, and no way to assemble $250.” It adds that USCIS refuses to process an application unless the fee is paid, meaning “a would-be petitioner who cannot pay before ‘aging out’ loses SIJS eligibility forever.”
The complaint further warns that children who lose eligibility “may face devastating and irreversible consequences, including: arrest and detention by ICE; deportation to countries where they have no family support; exposure to the same conditions of abuse, violence, or exploitation that precipitated their flight; loss of access to education, healthcare, and stable housing in the United States; and severe psychological trauma.”
The lawsuit also describes how the policy has affected the nonprofit organizations bringing the case.
Legal Services for Children alleges it has spent more than $5,000 from its own operating budget to cover filing fees for indigent youth since the policy took effect. The complaint states the organization filed 21 SIJS petitions after the fee was implemented and paid $250 for each filing using organizational funds that otherwise would have supported services for foster children, guardianship cases and educational advocacy.
CHIRLA alleges it likewise has been forced to divert staff time and financial resources to raise money for filing fees, conduct financial screenings and assist clients who cannot afford the costs. The complaint describes multiple families who took out loans, worked additional jobs or delayed filing while trying to assemble the required fees.
Jacob Gonzalez, a staff attorney with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, said the lawsuit seeks to restore access to humanitarian protections Congress intended to preserve.
“This lawsuit is about ensuring that the most vulnerable children in our immigration system, those who have survived abuse and abandonment, are not shut out of protection simply because they are poor,” Gonzalez said. “USCIS’s categorical ban on fee waivers is a direct violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and must be set aside.”
Carl Bergquist, counsel at CHIRLA, said every day the policy remains in place increases the risk that children will permanently lose their opportunity for legal protection.
“Every day this fee-waiver ban remains in effect, children who have been declared abused or abandoned by a state court are being forced to choose between sacrificing their safety and finding $250 they do not have,” Bergquist said. “This is not what Congress intended. We are fighting to restore access to justice for these children before they age out of protection forever.”
Cathy Sakimura, executive director of Legal Services for Children, said the fee barrier undermines the purpose of the humanitarian program itself.
“Children can only be eligible for this immigration status if they have been abused, abandoned, or neglected,” Sakimura said. “These children often have no family support and no financial resources. The purpose of SIJ status is to provide protection for vulnerable children and youth, and creating a financial barrier to this protection undermines the core purpose of this status.”
The lawsuit asserts two claims under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The first alleges the fee-waiver prohibition is arbitrary and capricious because the agency ignored the humanitarian purpose of the statute, the financial realities facing SIJS applicants and the potentially irreversible harm caused by aging out before filing.
According to the complaint, the agency failed to consider “the humanitarian purpose of the SIJS statute,” “the documented and near-universal indigence of the SIJS-eligible population,” and “the irreparable and permanent harms of deportation and aging out that result from denying SIJS access to children who cannot pay.”
The second claim argues USCIS created what amounts to a binding legislative rule without following the procedural safeguards required under federal law.
The complaint states, “Because Defendants’ categorical fee-waiver ban is a legislative rule, Defendants were required to promulgate it through notice-and-comment rulemaking. They did not do so.” It continues, “Defendants therefore adopted the categorical fee-waiver ban without observance of procedure required by law.”
The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare the fee-waiver ban unlawful, vacate the agency’s policy, require USCIS to resume accepting fee-waiver requests under its existing framework and issue preliminary and permanent injunctive relief preventing enforcement of the policy.
The case is Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights v. Mullin, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
To comment please go to one of these social media platforms:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DavisVanguard
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/peoples-vanguard-of-davis-inc/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davisvanguard/
X: https://x.com/davisvanguard
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/vanguardnewsgroup.bsky.social
Subscribe to the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
