A group of immigrant children is asking a federal court to certify a class action and put the kibosh on a Trump administration policy that could block them from legally working and lead to their deportation.

This year, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) authorized the rescission of a Joe Biden-era program that kept abused, neglected, and/or abandoned immigrant children from facing the threat of deportation and gave approved members the ability to apply for a work permit.

The plaintiffs – a collection of children in the country who signed up for a path to citizenship, as well as immigrant rights nonprofits – say the revocation of this program is “unreasoned and unlawful.”

On Thursday, in a 52-page complaint, the plaintiffs asked a federal judge in the Eastern District of New York to issue an injunction reversing the Trump administration”s decision.

The disputed policy concerns deferred action grants issued under the Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) classification.

As of now, the decades-old SIJS classification itself is not in danger of being removed – and is merely a pathway for applicants to speed up the process of obtaining permanent residency status.

In 2022, the Biden administration began the deferred action policy. This program gave SIJS-eligible youth affirmative protection from deportation and the ability to apply for a work permit while they wait for a visa. The latter provision allows beneficiaries to obtain Social Security cards, driver’s licenses, and bank accounts during this waiting period – which can sometimes last for several years.

Things changed abruptly – and initially without any notice whatsoever – sometime in April, the plaintiffs say. Suddenly, applicants were being kept in the dark about their deferred action status, the lawsuit says.

Whereas approvals or denials were typically included on SIJS documentation, the new forms were “nearly always silent on deferred action, neither granting nor denying it,” according to the filing.

While for nearly two months, the government’s policy appeared to be “an unexplained, sub silentio reversal,” of the deferred action grants, the Trump administration eventually ended the guesswork. On June 6, U.S. Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a formal notice that the “categorical” deferred action grants were ending.

The lawsuit warns of immense social destruction for a would-be class of abused and neglected immigrant youth that reaches into the thousands – youth who likely face violence in their country of origin.

“Protection from deportation and work authorization were lifelines for these young survivors of parental maltreatment,” the original petition reads. “Many thousands of SIJS beneficiaries have built their lives in the United States around their deferred action status, which allows them to reside, work, and study here pending visa availability.”

The nonprofits, for their part, complain that the swift change in policy – for nearly two months without official verification – has tested their resources to something not entirely unlike a breaking point.

One Long Island-based group says representing SIJS beneficiaries has quickly become “exponentially more difficult,” with the organization “forced to limit the scope of representation, the number of clients it represents in immigration cases, and the time and resources that the social services team can devote to each client.” A law clinic based in California essentially echoed those concerns and added that the “need for deportation defense will rise dramatically.”

“This is a case about broken promises with devastating consequences,” Rachel Davidson, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs said in a press release announcing the litigation. “State courts and the federal government have already found that it is not safe for these young people to return to their countries of origin, but their protection is now being callously stripped away. These young people have survived abuse, abandonment, and neglect only to be retraumatized now by the constant threat of detention and deportation from the same agencies that vowed to keep them safe.”

The lawsuit is premised on numerous alleged violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the federal statute governing the actions of administrative agencies. Specifically, the plaintiffs allege the quick policy shift violated the rule-making process and is also arbitrary and capricious – a closely-related term of art which applies to government actions that go too far while simultaneously eschewing formal processes.

As for the process itself, the plaintiffs allege the weeks of silence between the informal end of the deferred action policy and the formal announcement of the policy violates a legal doctrine – sourced from a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court opinion – that forces administrative agencies to abide by their own rules until they formally change them.

The lawsuit is asking a federal judge to enjoin the rescission policy and force the Trump administration to keep deferred action grants in place.

“The government’s decision to discontinue SIJS deferred action has already hurt me and is going to hurt me in the future,” the lead plaintiff, identified by her initials, A.C.R, said in a statement. “My dream is to become an astronaut. Without the protection of deferred action, I won’t be able to attend school and pursue my dreams, and I’ll live in constant fear of deportation.”