Q&A
Debate over pro se model for SIJS cases and concerns about legal representation
2:05:17
·
6 min
Council Member Alexa Avilés engaged in a debate with OAAHC representatives over the use of a pro se model for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) cases.
Key points of the debate included:
- OAAHC defended their pro se model as appropriate for 20-year-olds about to age out of eligibility, arguing it preserves their opportunity for SIJS.
- The council member strongly criticized this approach as irresponsible, potentially putting applicants at risk without ensuring proper legal representation.
- OAAHC claimed success based on filing applications, while the council member argued that true success should be measured by approved cases.
- The debate highlighted fundamental disagreements about the appropriate use of city resources and the best way to serve vulnerable youth.
- Concerns were raised about the long-term implications of opening cases without guaranteed legal follow-up.
- The discussion exposed tensions between quantity (number of applications filed) and quality (comprehensive legal representation) in serving this population.
Alexa Avilés
2:05:17
I mean, as you heard in the testimony, earlier, prosay model is not an appropriate model for such cases.
2:05:26
Why do you believe that it's an appropriate model?
Masha Gindler
2:05:30
I think it depends.
2:05:31
I think prosay model for twenty year olds is appropriate because what we're looking at is these folks might have not been served at all if we weren't able to do these emergency stitches because for a lot of the really amazing legal service providers that are doing this work and to whom we refer cases to as well.
2:05:50
We see them under 20.
2:05:52
They have limitations about the the folks being unaccompanied minors and have being at least 18 months from 21, in many cases being ordered, removed.
2:06:02
So there's some some understandable gaps in the system that we hope to be helpful with.
Alexa Avilés
2:06:09
What does that mean hope to be helpful helpful.
2:06:13
So we have a return.
2:06:14
We need legal representation.
2:06:15
What what does that mean?
2:06:16
What is Owasso gonna do for those cases?
Masha Gindler
2:06:19
I would say hope to be helpful in, like, scenario a, and it's a scenario where we don't provide the support, those individual Vijules probably would not get any legal support at all and would just age out of being eligible for Sage and missed that opportunity.
2:06:35
What we're able to do while it's not fully lower presentation is preserve them to make sure that they're able to file and be eligible for stage in time before they hit 21.
2:06:45
We're helping kids that are often I mean, I shouldn't say kids, kids loosely, but we're helping young adults that are weeks away from turning 21.
2:06:55
And so we want to be able to preserve that, submit their documents to UCIS, most likely once we get the family court documents, get them the such status, and then they have time now to be able to get additional ports to get that green card down the line.
2:07:11
As we heard, there's long lines for that process.
Alexa Avilés
2:07:13
So in in terms of these in terms of this group of cases, your pilot cases, were all of them screened to make sure that they were a year before their 21st birthday?
2:07:24
Yes.
2:07:24
Exactly.
2:07:25
Are are you screening and putting anyone through the system that is right ready to turn 21?
2:07:34
Like, couple months before their 21st birthday?
Masha Gindler
2:07:36
At at the moment, the pilot phase, we're focusing on folks that are, like, 4 weeks out of turning 21.
Alexa Avilés
2:07:44
Why would you do that?
Masha Gindler
2:07:46
When we were doing the pilot program, we had to prioritize the cases that were going to age out for us to figure out how to how to do it, to make sure we can do it, to make sure that we figure out all the kings in the prosay model.
2:08:00
And so it made most sense to focus on those that are about to age out, and also those individuals are not cases we could refer to legal service providers.
Alexa Avilés
2:08:09
So, you know, those are cases you're not gonna be able to get legal service provision for, but you you open them up and push them through anyway knowing potentially you may not even get a response for the petition within that time.
2:08:22
It just seems utterly irresponsible to do that.
Sarah Nolan
2:08:28
I wanna know a little bit
Masha Gindler
2:08:29
more about what you mean because from our perspective, active.
2:08:32
These are individuals that essentially in a couple weeks will never be eligible for stage.
2:08:38
But due to us walking them through the process and helping them fill out the prosay motions, they are able to in 95% of our cases so far in the pilot phase, able to get the family court documents.
2:08:50
They need to to submit with UCIS, and and and then we're able to apply them for work authorization, and we would be able to put an emotion to to stop removal proceedings as well if needed.
2:09:06
So it seems I I I think that the complicate patients around Prosafe model for SAGE are real and interesting on things we need to continue discussing.
2:09:14
And I respect the positions of folks about where the line of Prosafe for younger adults is.
2:09:22
But at the end of the day, these are people that would be forever left out of the option to be to be getting SAGE, deferred action, and potentially a green card unless we stepped in in these, you know, cases so far.
Alexa Avilés
2:09:41
There there's a lot to disagree with you.
2:09:43
It seems like Owasso has a knack for, like, just starting stuff and walking away.
2:09:48
And the implications around that are quite severe.
2:09:55
Mhmm.
2:09:55
And it seems like a little bit of malpractice to open up something when you know you won't be able to help they will not be able to access legal services and put them in direct jeopardy for not being able to actually get any relief at all.
2:10:13
It seems utterly irresponsible.
Masha Gindler
2:10:16
I would say we conducted this work in partnership with a lot of practitioners in the areas and and CBOs, and we felt like the the way that we're going about it does not will not result in any negative impact on the individual and would result in either You
Alexa Avilés
2:10:32
you did 39 at locations.
2:10:34
You only have 2 approved.
2:10:36
How are you claiming?
2:10:38
Unless unless the standard is here is filling out paperwork, if this if that's our outcome measure of success is filling out the paperwork, then we're were amazing.
2:10:48
But that is not the outcome of success.
2:10:51
Mhmm.
2:10:51
Correct?
Masha Gindler
2:10:52
Of course.
Alexa Avilés
2:10:53
So I I I think while you're obviously making a good effort, and this is not to say that you have different interests.
2:11:03
Yeah.
2:11:04
That is not a measure of success here.
2:11:06
And to claim, to use a model that we know does not work for this population, to use a metric of how many applicant petitions you were able to file is is not okay.
2:11:21
It's a little bit of a shell game.
2:11:23
I think we need to be honest here.
2:11:25
This is city resources that we have to invest appropriately to protect people and to support them.
2:11:31
If we know this is not gonna work in the long term, investing in it because we did a bunch of applications doesn't make any sense to me.
2:11:39
So I think I think with that, I'm gonna I think I'm gonna turn it over to my chair.
2:11:47
We have a lot more questions.
2:11:49
Thank you.