The Immigration Appeals Board earlier this month suspended Cowan for two years from serving in the Immigration Court, the Commission and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Cowan’s suspension was due to take effect on July 22, but her attorney, William Walker, said she is seeking a delay while the case is pending in federal court.

“I hope the Arizona federal district court sees this and asks people to return their attorneys,” Walker said. “If this happened and she was stopped from practicing, more than 1,000 people would lose their representation in court.”

Walker said Cowan’s organization is the only organization in Tucson that provides free assistance to immigrant customers.

Cowan has been an immigration attorney since 1986 and has been an attorney with the Pima County Court Defender since 2004. She is also a project supervisor for Keep Tucson Together, a grassroots organization working to stop deportation in immigration courts.

She was a co-founder of the Subway Sanctuary Movement, which helps asylum seekers fleeing the Central American Civil War in the 1980s. In a 2021 news release announcing the award awarded to Cowan, the American Immigration Lawyers Association said that Cowan was mentored by farmworker civil rights leaders Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Her suspension stems from a letter filed against her in 2019 to reprimand an Immigration Office disciplinary attorney. The notice charged her with 24 separate counts of “violating various sections of federal rules governing practice in immigration courts and boards,” according to her court records.

Five days of disciplinary hearings were held in 2020, and the number was debated before a judge.

In the first 11 counts, the government alleges that Mr. Cowan failed to file an appeal despite not providing specific grounds for the appeal and stating his intention to appeal in the notice of appeal. Court records also allege that she failed to notify the commission in a timely manner that she did not intend to appeal any of the cases listed in her notice of interest.

Cowan said he did not file a brief because the client chose not to file a brief, because he engaged in criminal conduct that was unlikely to be appealed, or because a review of the records did not reveal any issues to appeal, court records show.

“Defendant’s (Cowan) actions amounted to frivolous conduct,” court records said. “She failed to make reasonable efforts to determine whether there were issues to appeal before she filed notices of appeal in 10 of the 11 cases.”

In counts 12 through 16 and 19, the Government alleges that Cowan failed to file the court-ordered brief by the court-imposed deadline. Cowan did not oppose the allegations, but said he could not submit a brief because the pro bono clinic did not have the facilities to do so, or that a brief was unnecessary because the judge had all the information necessary to decide the case, court records show.

Cowan also said immigration judges generally do not require briefs, and that certain judges are “the only judges in the court’s practice to require briefs,” according to court records.

Finally, in counts 17, 18, 20-24, the government said Cowan failed to file an application for relief or to confirm that its customers met the biometric requirements by the court-imposed deadline.

In one case, Cowan requested no additional time to prepare the client’s application before the hearing. She then appeared at a hearing and said her client did not provide the necessary documents to timely file an application for relief, and she requested additional time, her court records say.

However, a judge involved in that particular case testified that Cowan’s client was a legal permanent resident and was trying to maintain his status, but was ordered to be removed because Cowan did not file an application, court records say.

After the takedown order was issued, the client hired a new attorney and filed a reopening of the case, citing Cowan’s ineffectiveness. Court records show that the judge ultimately granted relief for the client’s release.

“Despite the dire consequences, appellee failed to comply with her duty to timely file an application for alien relief, which initially resulted in her being deported,” court records read. “Defendant alleges that the client failed to cooperate in filing an application for relief, but the record proves that she was indeed incompetent and that her failure to act in accordance with her professional code of conduct led to the client’s dismissal order.”

Court records also indicate that Cowan did not seek a waiver of the application fee if the client could not afford the application or biometric fee. Ms Cowan said she didn’t know the biometric fee could be waived.

Adjudicating officials ultimately determined that disciplinary action was appropriate because Cowan violated ethical obligations, failed to follow due process, and repeatedly failed to comply with court-imposed orders, according to court records.

“Defendant’s misconduct detrimental to her clients, the judicial system, and the legal community at large,” court records said.

In December 2020, adjudicating officials ordered an indefinite suspension of at least five years with the condition of reinstatement.

Ms. Cowan later appealed the decision, saying that the unpaid service she provided was an important public interest benefit and that any sanctions involving suspension were unjust because her practice had improved so much since receiving more funding and staffing, according to court records.

On July 5, the board rejected Cowan’s appeal and ordered him suspended for two years.

Cowan’s refusal to explicitly admit or accept his wrongdoing before adjudication officials appeared to demonstrate a lack of remorse, according to the board’s decision. However, the record also shows evidence that she took steps to correct the pro bono clinic’s managerial deficiencies, including stating that she had not failed to file her brief since being informed by disciplinary attorneys.

According to the ruling, the judge who first filed a complaint with Cowan’s attorneys about her “problematic conduct” testified that she was not aware of any inappropriate conduct since the complaint was filed.

“Defendant’s efforts in this regard demonstrate acknowledgment of errors and mistakes in her previous processes and practices, even if she did not explicitly do so, and even if the AO called into question the enduring success of defendant’s newly implemented case management system and other efforts,” the court said.

Asked about his suspension, Walker said the decision came from an immigration court “appointed by Trump.”

“Throughout her career, this woman has been dedicated to helping immigrants and illegal immigrants get representation in court, and what Trump Immigration has done is do whatever it takes to make sure people have no legal representation at all,” Walker said. “They don’t want these people to be treated equally. They don’t want their opinions to be heard.”

“This is not about Margo Cowan,” Walker said. “This is about a regime that wants illegal immigrants to leave this country and be heard without proper representation. Terrible.”