For students in the Justice for Children Clinic, one client’s case became both a life-changing matter and a chance to shape how Ohio courts approach Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS).
Over the course of three semesters, students worked with a client who was seeking a divorce, sole custody of her children, and court findings that would allow her children to apply for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS). With supervision and guidance from Associate Dean for Experiential Programs Kimberly Jordan, students initially filed the case and conducted a final divorce hearing for the client, drafting all the necessary paperwork and making arguments to the court. The trial court granted the client a divorce and awarded her custody but did not make findings so the children could apply for SIJS.
In spring 2024, students conducted extensive research and wrote the appellate brief, pointing out inconsistencies in how the trial court interpreter a prior appellate decision and federal guidance regarding SIJS. Jordan then argued the case in front of the Tenth District Court of Appeals. After waiting over a year for a decision, the Court of Appeals modified the judgment from the trial court and entered the SIJS-related findings.
The decision was a major victory for the client: her children now have the findings they need to apply for SIJ status with the federal government and the possibility of permanent residency in the United States. Additionally, the decision also overruled a precedent set by the Tenth District that had made SIJS findings more difficult to obtain. Future state juvenile courts have clearer guidance on how to consider requests for special findings, allowing children to more easily apply for SIJS and gain stability and permanence in the United States.
“It also lays solid groundwork for future cases in terms of describing the law and the analysis that trial court judges ought to use in making their decisions,” Jordan said.
The decision was further reinforced in a later case Jordan argued in front of the Tenth District Court of Appeals involving another immigrant youth seeking SIJS.
“Courts have an obligation to consider making findings that make a child eligible for SIJS,” she explained. “Ultimately, the Court found that the trial court’s ‘departure from normal proceedings in the handling of this case’ prejudiced my client. It was remanded with instructions to issue an order with the findings we requested.”
The cases demonstrate how careful legal research, textual arguments, and advocacy can produce impactful results. For children applying for SIJS, the decisions opened the door to pursuing a more secure future in the United States. For Ohio courts, they established guidance that will influence future cases. The cases also illustrate the value of experiential learning, where students work on real, consequential cases and help shape the legal landscape they will enter.