HHS Broke a Migrant Children's Counsel Order; Proposed Former Trump Appointee's Firm for Up to $150 Million

One Day in August: A Violation Found, a $150 Million Proposal Published

On August 6, 2026, a federal judge found that Trump's Department of Health and Human Services had violated her order by withholding money for the lawyers who represent unaccompanied migrant children.¹ The same day, the Federal Register published the department's proposal to award up to $150 million, with no competitive bidding, to a Houston law firm founded by a former Trump appointee.²³⁴ HHS had let the children's nationwide legal-services contract expire on July 31.¹ On August 11 the firm, Burke Law Group, withdrew; none of the money was awarded.⁵ By October, advocates told the Associated Press, children were going to immigration hearings without lawyers.⁶

The charge: the department responsible for these children broke the order that kept their lawyers paid, then chose a firm connected to Trump's first administration for a no-bid award that collapsed.¹²⁵

The department is Trump's. He introduced Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at his swearing-in on February 13, 2025, as "our Secretary of Health and Human Services, just as I promised last year."⁷ Kennedy was still secretary in September 2026, when he signed the notice reorganizing children's legal representation.⁸ The firm's founder, Marcella Burke, served in Trump's first administration at the Environmental Protection Agency and the Interior Department, according to AP and her Federalist Society biography.³⁴

The notice, from HHS's Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which has custody of the children, named one firm for one year beginning August 15 and, AP reported, gave no justification for bypassing competition.²³ Burke declined to apply.⁵

The Judge Had Ordered the Money Kept Flowing

The order dated from April 29, 2025, when Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín barred HHS from withdrawing the services and funds in place on March 20, 2025, including money for children's direct legal representation.¹ HHS conceded that it had withheld that money since December 2025 and was still withholding it.¹ Martínez-Olguín found this violated "both the plain language as well as the spirit" of her injunction and, since HHS had told her the money was available for immediate disbursement, ordered it released by noon on August 7 with no further conditions.¹

HHS's defense was that it was enforcing contract terms and needed the Acacia Center for Justice, which managed the lawyers' network, to substantiate its invoices.¹⁶ On September 18, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) denied Acacia's protest of a separate, competitive solicitation and upheld new payment and documentation rules, finding that HHS had identified "real problems" with alternative payment models: improper incentives and wasteful overpayments.⁹ GAO also rejected Acacia's claim that the rules compelled disclosure of confidential or privileged information.⁹

But GAO ruled on a new contract's terms; the judge ruled on money already withheld under her order.⁹¹ The Ninth Circuit had already rejected the government's effort to recast the case as a contract dispute; now, she wrote, it was using one as a "shield" for failing to obey the injunction.¹

She expressly declined to interfere with HHS's contract with Acacia.¹ She required HHS to meet its obligation to fund children's representation.¹

A Small Firm and a Narrower Promise

HHS proposed one firm for a narrower assignment: representation while children remained in ORR care, with limited discharge planning and referrals for those leaving.² Until July 31, nearly 100 legal-aid providers nationwide did this work, AP reported.¹³ The proposed replacement was one Houston firm whose founder's biography emphasizes commercial litigation, energy and natural resources.²⁴ On August 5, AP found that only two of the 25 lawyers on its website claimed relevant immigration-law experience.³

Burke would have advised and represented children while they remained in ORR care.² For children leaving care, the notice proposed "limited" discharge-related planning and referrals to legal resources, not the same promise of attorney-of-record representation.²

Most children were outside that care, by one advocate's estimate: Michael Lukens of the Amica Center told AP that about 1,800 lived in shelters and roughly 22,000 with sponsors.³

HHS Said It Would Fill Gaps; Burke Withdrew Before an Award

HHS presented the Burke award as added capacity that would complement existing services and "help address identified gaps."² Its notice described the services "as required under" Martínez-Olguín's injunction, ORR's regulation and the statute that tells the government to ensure these children counsel to the greatest extent practicable and protect them from mistreatment, exploitation and trafficking.²¹

The proposal filled no gap: Burke withdrew, and on August 17 HHS said it would make no award.⁵

With Acacia's contract expired, the judge wrote, it appeared that "no mechanism presently exists" by which HHS was complying with her injunction.¹ Two newly reached agreements appeared to cover a fraction of the services needed nationwide, she said, and she ordered a compliance report.¹ On August 25, finding that an ORR official's declaration raised serious compliance questions, she set an evidentiary hearing for September 8.¹⁰

AP also obtained ORR emails asking children's existing lawyers for their clients' personal identification numbers and confirmation within four hours that they would appear at upcoming hearings. AP said the reason for those requests was unclear.³

The confusion reached the courtroom. At a Chicago hearing on August 5, an AP reporter watched an attorney who represented none of the children appear by video.³ She said ORR had asked her group, the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, to appear for children without lawyers, and that the government had given it their names and identifying numbers.³ The judge said all the children already had lawyers, and the outside attorney dropped off.³ "It sounds like this is a person who has my client’s information," said Laura Smith, who represented some of them.³

HHS Created Its Own Team, With Independence Safeguards

Kennedy's notice, published September 29, 2026, established the Unaccompanied Alien Children Legal Representation Division inside HHS's general counsel's office; its attorneys may advise children and appear as their counsel throughout their immigration proceedings, as appropriate.⁸

The notice separates the division from ORR, its parent agency and the HHS lawyers who advise them.⁸ It may not advise or represent ORR or that agency in a matter where it advises or represents a child, or those lawyers in a matter where it represents one, and its dealings with other offices must respect its professional duties to that child.⁸

But HHS's general counsel and a designated deputy supervise and control the division's legal work, its head reports to that deputy on legal matters and litigation strategy, and the general counsel answers directly to Kennedy.⁸

HHS told AP the division was "an additional mechanism" for giving children legal support.⁶ Shaina Aber, Acacia's executive director, answered that placing children's lawyers inside the agency that holds them in custody "does not meet basic standards of independence of counsel."⁶ The notice requires these safeguards; HHS did not tell AP when the division would be fully operational.⁸⁶

A New Organization Did Not Erase the Loss of Counsel

In AP's October 7 report, advocates described children going to hearings without lawyers, and Sui Chung of Americans for Immigrant Justice said the need exceeded available resources.⁶ GAO put the caseload under the Acacia contract at approximately 24,000 active children's cases.⁹

HHS has other arrangements, AP reported: a new contract with Our Rescue, potentially worth up to $244 million, and a temporary contract with the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants.⁶ HHS did not answer AP's questions about when its division would be fully operational or whether it would keep contracting with nongovernmental legal groups.⁶

The abuse of power was HHS's disruption of children's defense while withholding funding a court had ordered it to preserve.¹⁶ The department then selected a firm connected to Trump's first administration for a no-bid award of up to $150 million that collapsed before its start date.²⁴⁵ Children facing immigration proceedings bore the risk; by October, advocates were reporting hearings without counsel.⁶ A government entrusted to protect those children broke the funding order meant to keep their lawyers working.¹