“Textbook corruption and kids are paying the price,” Oregon Sen. Merkley claims Trump-linked firm in Texas was awarded huge contract supposed to help kids navigate immigration court

Oregon – Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley criticized the Trump administration after a Texas-based law firm with ties to the administration was selected for a $150 million contract to provide legal services to unaccompanied migrant children.

“The Administration awarded a huge contract that’s supposed to help kids navigate immigration court to a Trump-linked firm with only two lawyers with any knowledge or experience with immigration law,” Merkley said in a post Aug. 6. “Textbook corruption, and kids are paying the price.”

The contract, reported by NBC News and other outlets, is intended to provide legal representation and related services to unaccompanied migrant children in federal custody. The firm selected for the agreement is the Houston-based Burke Law Group.

The arrangement has drawn scrutiny because Burke Law Group is a relatively small firm and has limited experience in immigration law compared with the organizations that previously provided services to migrant children.

The Associated Press reported that only two of the firm’s 25 lawyers list immigration experience. Other attorneys at the firm have backgrounds including corporate law and conservative advocacy.

The contract was awarded through a noncompetitive, sole-source process, according to reporting on the agreement. The proposed arrangement followed the expiration of a longstanding contract with a network of legal aid providers that had represented thousands of unaccompanied migrant children.

The shift has raised questions about whether the new provider has the capacity and specialized experience necessary to handle a large number of children’s immigration cases.

The Washington Post reported that the Office of Refugee Resettlement, an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services that oversees shelters for unaccompanied migrant children, planned to award the $150 million contract to Burke Law Group.

The agreement is intended to cover legal services for children facing immigration proceedings, including legal representation and assistance navigating the immigration system, Washington Post reported.

The change in providers comes at a particularly significant time for unaccompanied migrant children because immigration cases can determine whether children remain in the United States or are ordered removed.

The Associated Press reported that the administration’s approach has also raised concerns among immigrant advocates because immigration proceedings have been accelerated while access to experienced legal assistance has become more uncertain.

The previous provider, the Acacia Center for Justice, had operated a broad network of legal organizations serving thousands of children. According to the Houston Chronicle, the previous system served more than 24,000 children through its network.

The transition has also been complicated by disputes over federal funding. Reporting indicated that payments owed to legal service providers had become part of a broader disagreement surrounding the expiration of the previous arrangement.

Critics of the new contract have focused particularly on the firm’s size and its limited immigration-law experience. They argue that representing children in immigration court requires specialized knowledge, particularly because many cases involve asylum claims, family circumstances and other complicated legal issues.

Rep. Joaquin Castro, a Texas Democrat, has separately called for an independent investigation into the contract. According to the San Antonio Express-News, Castro questioned why the administration selected Burke Law Group through a noncompetitive process when an earlier federal solicitation had contemplated full and open competition, per reports.

The administration’s decision has therefore generated criticism from lawmakers and immigration advocates who want greater transparency regarding the selection process and the firm’s qualifications.

Merkley’s statement was among the latest political reactions to the agreement. His characterization of the contract as “textbook corruption” is his assessment of the arrangement, rather than a finding that the contract was legally corrupt.

The controversy ultimately centers on whether the new provider can deliver effective legal representation to a vulnerable population while handling the scale of the federal government’s needs.

As the administration moves forward with the new agreement, lawmakers and legal advocates are expected to continue examining how the contract was awarded, the firm’s qualifications and whether children in immigration proceedings will have consistent access to experienced legal representation.

The $150 million agreement has consequently become another point of contention over the Trump administration’s immigration policies, with critics arguing that the selection process and the firm’s limited immigration experience warrant closer scrutiny.