Trump dismisses additional immigration judges, fueling speculations that court reshaping is being pursued to align judicial decisions with his wishes
Revamped Article:
Here's a lowdown on the Trump administration's controversial moves, stirring unease among Democrats, scholars, and others. The administration's recent decision to let go of at least eight immigration judges, with four hailing from California, has raised alarm bells about the erosion of due process protections for immigrants.
Matt Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, comments, "These firings make no sense. Each judge processes around 500 to 700 cases a year, mainly deportation cases. So, effectively, what he's done is he's increased the already colossal backlog that the immigration courts already face."
The Executive Office for Immigration Review, the body responsible for the immigration court system, terminated at least two dozen more immigration judges and supervising judges in February, including five Californian judicial seats, according to the judges' union. The administration also eliminated five leadership positions at the EOIR and dismissed nine Board of Immigration Appeals judges appointed under President Biden. Besides this, 85 professional court staff members received buyout offers.
In a memo issued after the February firings, EOIR acting Director Sirce E. Owen stated that immigration judges no longer possessed "multiple layers of removal restrictions" or civil service protection benefits that they previously enjoyed.
Owen referred to Justice Department Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle's statements that the agency aimed to restore "accountability so that Executive Branch officials answer to the President and to the people."
Mizelle proclaimed, "Unelected and constitutionally unaccountable administrative law judges have exercised immense power for far too long."
Biggs hypothesized that judges slated to replace the departing ones could be "political loyalists." He questioned, "Do they intend to fire immigration judges because they don't rule on cases the way Donald Trump wants them to rule? It's easy to imagine a scenario where that could happen."
Thirteen judges who were in probationary status have filed a class appeal to the U.S. Merit System Protection Board in Atlanta, claiming wrongful termination.
The Department of Justice did not respond to requests for comment.
California
The Trump administration's policies have led to unaccompanied minors losing avenues to legal representation and fears about rapid deportations. California has seen a significant impact.
Legal scholar Alison Peck, author of "The Accidental History of the U.S. Immigration Courts: War, Fear, and the Roots of Dysfunction," explains that the immigration courts lack the same level of judicial independence as federal district courts. Their decisions can be overturned by the U.S. attorney general, although this power has seldom been exercised historically.
The changes should be understood within the broader context of the administration's efforts to swiftly deport immigrants. This month, the EOIR urged judges to terminate asylum cases deemed legally deficient, allowing for fast-tracked and expedited closures without hearings.
"They're experimenting with different ways to expel immigrants," says UC Irvine clinical professor of law, Sameer Ashar. He points to the administration's recent detention of three university students in a remote Louisiana detention center, making it difficult for them to access representation. The administration has also deployed a wartime law to deport dozens of individuals alleged to be members of a Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua, to El Salvador.
"We should view all these efforts as experiments – in their attempt to bring expedited removal to all, to the entire system," Ashar adds. "It's part of the administration's attack on due process for immigrants in the U.S."
President Trump has publicly asserted that undocumented immigrants should not receive trials before being deported, stating, "We're getting them out, and I hope we get cooperation from the courts because you know, we have thousands of people that are ready to go out, and you can't have a trial for all of these people."
With 3.7 million pending cases, the immigration courts are grappling with a massive backlog. In California, nearly 400,000 cases are pending, with the largest backlog in San Francisco, where three judges were removed, and the second largest in Concord, where another three judges were terminated.
The backlog, according to Lora Ries, director of the Border Security and Immigration Center at the conservative Heritage Foundation, is partly due to the time-consuming hearings and extensions associated with immigration cases that can prolong for years. The administration's decision to fast-track them is justified, Ries argues.
Ranking members of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, including Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md), along with numerous other Democrats, penned a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi in March. They inquired about the administration's rationale for firing so many judges and demanded explanations for the depth of cuts within the agency.
The lawmakers wrote that the absence of experienced assistant chief judges would harm the most urgent court cases – such as those dealing with detained individuals, families, and children with credible fears of returning to their home countries – and further delay any hearings for migrants applying to enter from Mexico under the Remain in Mexico policy.
Bondi has yet to respond to the letter.
"These changes constitute another tactic in the Trump administration's anti-immigrant, mass-deportation agenda that attempts to reshape our immigration system," U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) states in a press release to The Times. "The courts have long struggled to keep up with a growing backlog of cases due to political meddling over the years. This recent firing of immigration judges and professional staff members only makes matters worse."
Within the court system, uncertainty is widespread. Kerry Doyle, appointed by the Biden administration as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorney, spoke of her experiences. Doyle was just about to complete a year-long judge training program in Massachusetts when she received an email that she would be let go.
"People are doing really hard jobs and working really hard, and it's very hard to focus and do your work when you're not sure day to day if you're still going to be there, or to feel like things are happening and you don't know why or what may happen," Doyle shares.
- The Trump administration's decision to let go of at least eight immigration judges, with four from California, has raised concerns about the erosion of due process protections for immigrants.
- Matt Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, commented that these firings make no sense, as each judge processes around 500 to 700 cases a year, mainly deportation cases.
- The administration's policy changes should be understood within the broader context of the administration's efforts to swiftly deport immigrants, including fast-tracking asylum cases deemed legally deficient.
- UC Irvine clinical professor of law, Sameer Ashar, stated that we should view all these efforts as experiments, part of the administration's attack on due process for immigrants in the U.S.
- California has seen a significant impact from the Trump administration's policies, with nearly 400,000 cases pending in the state, and the largest backlog in San Francisco and Concord.
- Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) stated that these changes constitute another tactic in the Trump administration's anti-immigrant, mass-deportation agenda, further delaying any hearings for migrants.
- In a press release,Padilla expressed that the courts have long struggled to keep up with a growing backlog of cases due to political meddling, and the recent firing of immigration judges only makes matters worse.
