Individuals filing for asylum in the US often turn to immigration nonprofit organizations for help – and for good reason. These organizations have built a solid reputation for providing high-quality services and support, often at little or no cost to the individuals they serve. However, the demand for these services consistently outstrips their capacity, forcing these nonprofits to often turn away viable cases. In 2021 alone, the US admitted only 17,692 asylees, and the backlog of cases keeps growing.
This unfortunate reality leaves many asylum seekers without a clear path forward.
Traditional legal services can be prohibitively expensive, while unlicensed “notarios” or other unqualified immigration service providers frequently deliver substandard assistance, leading to bigger problems down the road. Because of this impossible situation, many asylum seekers end up missing critical deadlines, such as the one-year filing period, or falling through the cracks of an overburdened system.
But what if non-profit organizations could partner with an attorney-let asylum tech company specifically designed to handle asylum applications at scale, and at an affordable cost? This would mean that no viable case goes unaddressed, ensuring asylum seekers can file their Forms I-589 in time, secure their Employment Authorization Documents (EADs), allow them to work, and get in line for their asylum hearing.
This article is going to take a closer look at how immigration nonprofit organizations and tech-driven services can streamline the asylum process. Let’s dive in.
Table of Contents
Why do Immigration nonprofits often turn away asylum clients?
Nonprofit organizations provide an invaluable service by offering mostly free, high-quality legal advice and representation to clients in need, whether they are unable to afford paid legal services or have extenuating circumstances. While their commitment to providing access to justice for all is commendable, they often face significant scalability challenges that limit their ability to assist every potential client who needs their help.
Immigration nonprofits typically operate with limited resources and may only have a small number of staff attorneys. This constraint inevitably leads to a situation where they have to turn people away, as the volume of cases simply exceeds their capacity to handle them. The reality is that for every individual they can assist, many more may be left without representation.
They also rely heavily on donors and grants, who understandably expect to see positive results from their donations. While this expectation is not inherently problematic, it can sometimes lead nonprofits to prioritize cases that are perceived as particularly strong, clear-cut, or aligned with specific demographic criteria or areas of focus.
As a result, cases that fall outside these parameters may be deprioritized or overlooked. It’s not that anyone actively wants to turn away clients, but with their limited resources, they just can’t handle them. In some instances, they may refer clients to private attorneys, but this option may be out of reach for many asylum seekers due to the expense of the application process.
So, those who can’t secure immigration nonprofit representation or afford private legal services are faced with a difficult choice: proceed with their asylum application without legal guidance, risking potential errors or omissions that could jeopardize their case, or seek assistance from unscrupulous service providers, who may offer help at a lower cost than a licensed immigration attorney, but who may put their applications at risk.
This dilemma highlights the need for nonprofits to explore innovative solutions that can help them scale their services and reach a broader range of clients in need.
Why Should we look at the ALICE threshold with regard to immigration tech and access to legal services?
The high cost of legal services poses a significant barrier for those 41% of US households who are at or below the ALICE threshold. These individuals barely make ends meet, and for those who also have immigration needs, getting an immigration lawyer is almost always unaffordable. Even those potentially facing severe consequences, such as deportation, may lack resources for adequate representation.
Lawyers tend to be expensive, and while pro bono legal services exist, they are often limited in scope and oversubscribed. Pro bono immigration services typically target low-income individuals and families below the FPL. So, while essential, pro bono resources are limited and may not serve those who still struggle financially but don’t qualify as low-income per se.
This translates to millions of people who don’t qualify for pro bono legal aid but also lack the resources for traditional immigration attorneys. Studies have shown that legal representation significantly improves outcomes in immigration cases with represented individuals over ten times more likely to succeed in their legal cases than those without representation.
In other words, individuals who cannot afford legal services and don’t qualify for free legal representation are more likely to attempt to represent themselves in immigration proceedings and thus have a statistically lower chance of approval.
Technology has been posited as a solution to streamline and provide greater access to legal support. However, current immigration tech tools are still priced out of reach for many people or not targeted towards the clients themselves. The real need is for technology that offers an affordable way to address specific, essential aspects of the immigration process. This highlights the need for legal tech solutions that support the ALICE demographic.
Immigration nonprofits can now partner with an asylum tech company to help more people
Given the many challenges nonprofits face when providing comprehensive legal representation to everyone who is in need of it, bridging the gap is clearly a priority. Partnering with organizations that offer attorney-led support for asylum applications at a reasonable cost while maintaining the capacity to handle a high volume of cases can be the solution. This is where the potential of limited-scope representation combined with the latest legal tech comes in.
Limited scope representation — assisted by the latest legal tech — is an alternative to full-service legal representation, where an attorney’s involvement is limited to specific aspects of the case. This typically means filing the necessary paperwork correctly and on time, with supporting documentation and evidence. In the context of asylum cases, this often means the attorney provides legal services solely for the initial application stage rather than taking on representation for the entire duration of the case, including any appeals or hearings.
This includes filing their I-589 asylum application form with attorney oversight and review at every step and securing their Employment Authorization Document (EAD). Obtaining work authorization allows the individual to work legally in the US while their case is pending. This provides a means of financial stability, meaning they can potentially seek full representation at a later date. Limited-scope representation can provide affordable access to attorney expertise during this make-or-break stage by focusing resources on the critical application phase.
What if there was an innovative legal tech service that delivered a tech solution, developed by an experienced asylum attorney, that helps file asylum applications at scale and with the absolute highest level of quality?
Access61 can help immigration NGOs scale their support of asylum seekers
If you’re an immigration nonprofit struggling to meet the demand for asylum legal services, Access61 can help you scale. By leveraging a combination of legal expertise and technological innovation, we have developed a service that allows asylum seekers to access affordable, attorney-led guidance to file their I-589, apply for their EAD, and get in line for an individual hearing.
If you’re interested in applying for asylum but face financial or time constraints, our limited scope representation model offers a viable solution. Whether you cannot afford the full legal fee upfront or need to file your application promptly to meet the one-year deadline, Access61 can provide the guidance and support you need to initiate your case successfully. Get in contact to learn more about partnering with us.
frequently Asked Questions About EOIR Limited Appearance Representation
What does “limited appearance” mean?
“Limited appearance” is when an attorney represents a client for a specific part or proceeding of a legal case, instead of the entire case. This allows clients to get legal help for specific needs without full engagement, often saving costs.
What is included in appearance?
Appearance includes an attorney’s physical presence in court, filing of legal documents, and motions, and participation in negotiations, hearings, and other related legal proceedings on behalf of a client.
Does appearance make a difference in court?
Yes, having an attorney present in court ensures that a client’s rights are protected, their case is effectively presented, and they are guided through legal procedures, which can influence the case outcome significantly.
Can an EOIR-60 or EOIR-61 be filed in any case?
No, EOIR-60 and EOIR-61 forms are specific to cases handled by the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) and are related to immigration court proceedings. They are not applicable in other legal cases.
Who is required to complete an EOIR-60 or EOIR-61?
An EOIR-60 or EOIR-61 must be completed by attorneys or accredited representatives who wish to enter an appearance in immigration court formally or before the Board of Immigration Appeals on behalf of a client. The forms notify the court and the opposing party of the legal representation.