Immigration advocates have long noted how ethical challenges pervade\u00a0certain areas of their practice, particularly in the employment and spousal\u00a0contexts. A significant body of literature exists that attempts to identify clear,\u00a0professional norms for grappling successfully with thorny ethical questions\u00a0inherent in those areas. This article expands that scholarship by studying the\u00a0ethics issues that arise for counsel representing youth seeking Special\u00a0Immigrant Juvenile (\u201cSIJ\u201d) status in state court. Using SIJ case studies to\u00a0explore questions of confidentiality, conflicts, and candor, this article\u00a0uncovers key factors that complicate practitioners\u2019 ability to comply with\u00a0existing ethical mandates. One defining feature of SIJ relief is the requirement\u00a0that separate proceedings be brought in state court as the first step in\u00a0establishing youth\u2019s eligibility for relief. Other distinguishing factors include\u00a0the effects of abandonment, abuse, and neglect on the SIJ youth. In addition,\u00a0the decision-making capacity of SIJ minors is subject to scrutiny under the\u00a0relevant ethics rules due to their age. These factors combine with a systemic\u00a0lack of resources to pressure SIJ advocates into unworkable attorney-client\u00a0relationships rife with conflicts of interests. This project confirms that SIJ\u00a0practitioners receive inadequate guidance from existing rules of professional\u00a0conduct and proposes practical reforms of the state court SIJ process, as well\u00a0as new trainings on implementation of core ethics rules in the SIJ representation.\u00a0The article concludes with an invitation for further study of these proposals\u00a0as a critical step in offering long-overdue relief to SIJ counsel.<\/p>\n