TRAC data reveal a widening representation gap across America, raising concerns over equal access to justice for immigrants. For thousands of immigrants appearing before U.S. Immigration Courts, the outcome of their case may depend on far more than the facts presented to a judge. It may also depend on whether they can find an attorney and increasingly, where they live.The latest data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) show a troubling national decline in legal representation. In August 2026, only 24% of immigrants, including unaccompanied children, had an attorney when a removal order was issued.
The numbers become even more striking when viewed over time. The percentage of immigrants represented in completed Immigration Court cases fell from 63% in fiscal year 2021 to just 32% in fiscal year 2026 through August, according to TRAC.The government, meanwhile, is represented by attorneys in Immigration Court. Immigrants who cannot afford private counsel generally do not receive a government-appointed lawyer because immigration proceedings are civil rather than criminal proceedings.That leaves nonprofit organizations, immigration clinics, volunteer attorneys and law firms attempting to fill a massive gap.
A Two-Tiered Reality?
The result is a system in which access to legal assistance can vary dramatically from state to state.For cases filed during the previous 90 days, Maine had a representation rate of 70.5%, followed by Hawaii at 70.2%. West Virginia was at 65.5%, Maryland at 59.1% and Massachusetts at 56.8%.At the opposite end was New Jersey, where only 18.2% of immigrants in newly filed cases had obtained representation.Alaska stood at 24%, Kentucky at 24.3%, Arkansas at 24.5% and Illinois at 25.6%.
Those differences raise an uncomfortable question: Can access to justice depend on a person’s ZIP code?California: High Overall Representation, But New Cases Tell Another Story.California presents an important case study.TRAC reported 331,503 pending Immigration Court cases in California, of which 245,842—or 74.2% had representation.But among cases filed during the previous 90 days, the representation rate was 52.8%.That distinction matters.
People who have been in the system longer have had more time to locate attorneys, while newly filed cases can begin with much lower representation. TRAC notes that representation rates generally increase as immigrants have more time to obtain counsel.California’s large immigrant population also means that even a relatively high percentage can translate into a substantial number of people without attorneys.For immigrant communities including Punjabi and Sikh communities across California—the availability of qualified immigration lawyers, nonprofit legal clinics and affordable legal assistance remains an important community concern.
Behind every percentage is an individual or family trying to navigate a complicated legal system.Immigration cases can involve asylum claims, family relationships, employment histories, prior immigration records, criminal allegations, humanitarian protections and other highly technical legal questions.Without legal assistance, many immigrants may struggle to understand what relief could potentially be available to them, what evidence is required, which deadlines apply or how to present their circumstances before the court.
That does not mean every unrepresented person would win their case if they had an attorney. Nor does representation guarantee a favorable outcome.But it does raise a fundamental question about whether people facing removal have a meaningful opportunity to understand and present their cases.The problem is not simply that immigrants are unwilling to seek lawyers.There are not enough immigration attorneys and legal-service providers to meet the enormous demand.TRAC reports that efforts to expand the supply of immigration attorneys initially increased the number of represented immigrants as Immigration Court activity grew following the COVID-19 shutdowns.But that expansion has not kept pace with demand.
Disclaimer: This article and accompanying images are for informational and illustrative purposes only. Some visuals may be AI-generated or digitally enhanced and may not depict actual events or persons.Views expressed are based on publicly available information and analysis