“`html
Immigration Courts in Crisis: Judge Firings Fuel Due Process Concerns
Table of Contents
A wave of departures-through firings, retirements, and resignations-has dramatically reshaped the landscape of U.S. immigration courts, raising serious questions about due process and the rule of law. More than a quarter of federal immigration judges in California have left their positions since the start of the Trump administration, mirroring a nationwide trend as the administration aggressively pursued increased deportations.
A system Under Strain
the reduction in the number of immigration judges comes as the administration has significantly escalated efforts to deport individuals living in the U.S. without legal authorization. Officials within the Trump administration have characterized the existing immigration court process-burdened by a backlog of millions of cases that can take years to resolve-as an obstacle to achieving their policy goals. Last fiscal year,the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR),the Justice Department arm overseeing immigration courts,reported 735 immigration judges nationwide. However, the union representing these judges indicates that at least 97 have been fired since President Trump took office, with roughly the same number choosing to resign or retire.
California has been particularly hard hit, losing at least 35 immigration judges since January, down from a previous total of 132, according to data analyzed by Mobile Pathways, a Berkeley-based organization. The San Francisco Immigration Court has experienced the most significant decline,losing more than half of its judges.
“A noncitizen might win their case, might lose their case, but the key question is, did they receive a hearing?” asked emmett Soper, a former Justice Department employee who became an immigration judge in Virginia in 2017. “Up until this administration, I had always been confident that I was working in a system that, despite its flaws, was fundamentally fair.”
Eroding Legitimacy and a “Deportation Judge” Mentality
The changes have sparked widespread criticism, with many arguing that the administration is deliberately undermining the integrity of the immigration court system. “Our government institutions are losing their legitimacy,” stated Amber George, a former San Francisco Immigration Court judge who was terminated last month.
The administration’s approach is further evidenced by recent job postings for immigration judges in cities like Los Angeles and San francisco. These listings explicitly seek candidates who desire to be a “deportation judge” and “restore integrity and honor to our Nation’s Immigration Court system,” a phrasing the immigration judges union has labeled “insulting.” Former President trump himself expressed frustration with the courts in April, writing on Truth Social that he was elected to “remove criminals from our Country, but the Courts don’t seem to want me to do that.” He added, “We cannot give everyone a trial, because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years.”
The National association of Immigration Judges anticipates a further wave of retirements at the end of the month, exacerbating the existing crisis. George expressed deep concern for those caught in the resulting uncertainty, asking, “what can they count on when the ground is literally shifting every moment that they’re here?”
Shift to Military Judges and Concerns Over Independence
The administration has attempted to fill some vacancies with military judges, a move critics say compromises the independence of the judiciary. “The administration is trying to address the backlog by bringing in judges who are not necessarily familiar with immigration law and who have a different mindset,” said one immigration attorney,speaking on condition of anonymity. “They’re looking for people who will move cases quickly, even if it means sacrificing due process.” The attorney added that the use of military judges could further erode public trust in the immigration court system. “It’s a Band-Aid solution that doesn’t address the underlying problems,” she said.
Calls for Independence and Legal Challenges
Complementary bills introduced in the Senate and House by Sen. adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Rep. Juan Vargas (D-San Diego) aim to prevent the appointment of military lawyers as temporary immigration judges and limit their service to two years. While these bills face an uphill battle in the Republican-controlled Congress, they underscore the strong opposition to the administration’s changes, particularly from Democrats in California.
Former Immigration Judge tania Nemer has filed a lawsuit against the Justice Department and Attorney general Pam Bondi, alleging illegal termination based on her gender, ethnic background, and political affiliation. Bondi dismissed the allegations in a recent Cabinet meeting, stating, “one of the reasons she said she was a woman. Last I checked, I was a woman as well.” Other former judges, including Johnson, have appealed their terminations through the
