An Oakland lawmaker is making a high-stakes push to overhaul how California handles deportation cases, rolling out a plan that would put state-funded attorneys on the front lines for residents fighting removal. On Thursday, Assemblymember Mia Bonta introduced AB 2600, a proposal that would set up a statewide program to pay public defenders, nonprofit legal clinics, and private immigration lawyers to represent people in immigration court, with a special focus on those locked in detention. Supporters say the measure is aimed at cutting down on family separations and giving residents a fairer shot in a civil court system that does not automatically provide counsel.
The bill was filed in late February and, in its introduced form, states the intent of the Legislature to fund legal representation for people in removal proceedings, according to CalMatters. Reporting from The Oaklandside adds that AB 2600 would prioritize immigrants held in detention, steer funding toward public defender offices, nonprofit legal organizations, and private immigration attorneys, and is drafted to take effect in 2027.
Why advocates say counsel matters
Backers of the bill are leaning hard on the numbers. A national analysis of more than 1.2 million immigration cases found that people with lawyers were far more likely to win some form of relief in court, about 5.5 times more likely in that study, than those who had to represent themselves.
Research summarized by the University of Pennsylvania Law Review points to higher bond-release rates and faster adjudication when immigrants have attorneys. Separate reporting from the American Immigration Council underscores that quicker case resolution can drive down detention costs, a talking point supporters are eager to highlight.
Supporters and who’s backing the bill
More than 60 organizations have lined up behind AB 2600, according to The Oaklandside. Bruno Huizar, one of the advocates quoted by the outlet, called legal representation “a lifeline — and every person deserves the right to a lawyer when their life, liberty, and freedom are on the line.” Sponsor groups named by Oaklandside include the Vera Institute of Justice, the California Immigrant Policy Center, and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.
Legal context and limits
Immigration removal proceedings take place in a federal civil system, which means there is no constitutional guarantee of a court-appointed lawyer, as there is for criminal defendants. A state law like AB 2600 could not create a federal right to counsel, legal experts and advocates note, but it could use state dollars to fund and coordinate attorneys who represent Californians in federal immigration courts.
The studies and analyses cited by supporters are often used to argue that when states step in to fund representation, outcomes in immigration cases can shift and court operations can run more efficiently. AB 2600 is pitched as one of those state-level efforts, with California potentially building a formal structure around work that has often depended on patchwork nonprofit and local programs.
What happens next
The bill is currently moving through the Assembly committee process and will need both policy committee approval and budget backing before any new program can launch. The CalMatters tracker lists the measure as introduced in late February and notes it may be heard in committee next Monday.
If AB 2600 advances, lawmakers and budget writers will have to decide how large a program to build, which groups of immigrants to prioritize, and how to structure contracts with local public defender offices and legal nonprofits to actually provide the services.
Supporters say the proposal could mark a major shift in how Californians facing deportation defend themselves, especially for people held in remote or for-profit detention facilities. Critics, for their part, are expected to home in on the price tag and to question how far a state can or should go when it comes to intervening in federal immigration proceedings as the bill makes its way through Sacramento.
