California has lost more than a quarter of its immigration judges this year

WASHINGTON— More than a quarter of federal immigration judges in California have been fired, retired or resigned since the beginning of the Trump administration.

The reduction follows a trend in immigration courts across the country and, critics say, constitutes an attack on the rule of law and will lead to further delays in an overburdened court system.

The reduction in the number of immigration judges comes as the administration steps up efforts to deport immigrants living in the United States illegally. Trump administration officials have described the immigration court process, where trials can take years in an environment where millions of cases are backlogged, as an obstacle to their goals.

There were nationwide 735 immigration judges last fiscal year, according to the Executive Office of Immigration Review, the arm of the Justice Department that houses immigration courts. At least 97 people have been fired since President Trump took office, and about the same number have resigned or retired, according to the union that represents immigration judges.

California has lost at least 35 immigration judges since January, according to Mobile Pathways, a Berkeley-based organization that analyzes immigration court data. This number is down from 132. The steepest decline occurred in the San Francisco Immigration Court, which lost more than half its seats.

“A non-citizen may win or lose his case, but the real question is: was there a hearing?” “Until this administration, I was always confident that I was working in a system that, despite its flaws, was fundamentally fair,” said Emmett Soper, who worked for the Justice Department before becoming an immigration judge in Virginia in 2017.

The administration plans to fill some judge positions, and a new immigration judge is also job listings Los Angeles, San Francisco and other locations are seeking candidates who want to become “deportation judges” and “restore the integrity and dignity of our Nation’s Immigration Court system.”

The immigration judges union called the job postings “insulting.”

Trump wrote on Truth Social in April that he was “elected to remove criminals from our country, but the Courts don’t seem to want me to do that.”

“We can’t judge everyone, because it would take literally 200 years to do that,” he added.

National Assn. The Board of Immigration Judges said it expects an additional wave of retirements later this month.

“My biggest concern is for people whose lives remain uncertain. What can they trust when the ground is literally changing every moment they’re here?” said Amber George, who was fired from San Francisco Immigration Court last month. “Our state institutions are losing legitimacy.”

Because immigration courts operate under the Justice Department, their priorities often shift from one presidential administration to another, but the extreme changes have renewed long-standing calls for immigration courts to be independent from the executive branch.

Trump administration 36 judges were recently added; 25 of them are military lawyers serving on temporary assignments.

This summer, the Pentagon authorized some 600 military lawyers to work at the Justice Department. This comes after the department changed the requirements for temporary immigration judges, eliminating the need for immigration law experience.

The Justice Department did not respond to specific questions but said judges must be impartial and the agency is obligated to take action against those who display systemic bias.

Because terminations occur without notice, remaining court staff often struggle to expedite developments on reassigned cases, former judges say.

Dismissed judges described a pattern: In the afternoon, sometimes while presiding over a hearing, they receive a brief email stating that their duties have been terminated under Article 2 of the Constitution. Their names were quickly removed from the Department of Justice website.

Jeremiah Johnson is one of five judges recently dismissed from the San Francisco Immigration Court.

Johnson said he is concerned that the Trump administration is circumventing immigration courts by making conditions so intolerable that immigrants decide to drop their cases.

The number of detained immigrants has risen to record levels since January; More than 65,000 people were detained. Immigrants and lawyers say: conditions are inhumanefor alleged medical negligence, criminal solitary confinement, and denial of access to legal counsel. Immigrants’ requests for voluntary departures that avoid formal deportation have increased in recent months.

Many of these arrests took place in courthouses, causing immigrants to avoid legal claims for fear of being detained and judges being forced to order their removal in absentia.

“These are ways to get people to leave the United States without seeing a judge, without due process that Congress provides,” Johnson said. “This is the dismantling of the judicial system.”

San Francisco Immigration Court judges have historically had asylum approval rates above the national average. Grant rates depend on a variety of conditions, including whether the person is detained or has legal representation, their country of origin and whether they are an adult or a juvenile, Johnson said.

In November, military judges in immigration courts heard 286 cases and ruled on 110, according to Mobile Pathways. Military judges ordered deportation in 78% of cases; That was more often than any other immigration judge that month, who issued deportation orders in 63% of cases.

“They’re probably following instructions — and the military is very good at following instructions — and it’s clear what the instructions are given by this administration,” said Bartlomiej Skorupa, co-founder of Mobile Pathways. He cautioned that 110 cases was a small sample size and that trends would become clearer in the coming months.

Former immigration judges and their advocates say appointing people with no immigration experience and little education leads to a steep learning curve and the possibility of due process violations.

“There are several concerns here: that they are temporary and could subject them to greater pressure to decide cases in a particular way; “They also lack experience in immigration law, which is an extremely complex practice area,” said Ingrid Eagly, an immigration law professor at UCLA.

More than 3 million cases are backlogged in immigration courts. Anam Petit, who served as an immigration judge in Virginia until September, said the administration’s emphasis on expedited completion of cases must be balanced with the constitutional right to a fair hearing.

“There are not enough judges to hear these cases and this administration [is] “They have taken it upon themselves to remove many experienced and trained judges who can hear these cases and reduce this backlog,” he said.

Supplementary invoices Legislation introduced this month in the U.S. Senate and House by Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Rep. Juan Vargas (D-San Diego) would block military lawyers from being appointed as temporary immigration judges and impose a two-year service limit.

“The Trump administration’s willingness to fire experienced immigration judges and hire inexperienced or temporary ‘deportation judges,’ especially in places like California, has fundamentally affected the landscape of our justice system,” Schiff said in a statement announcing the bill.

The bills don’t stand a chance in the Republican-controlled Congress, but they show how strongly Democrats — especially in California — oppose the administration’s changes to immigration courts.

Former Immigration Judge Tania Nemer, a dual citizen of Lebanon and the United States, filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice and the Advocate. General Pam Bondi this month, Claiming that his employment was unlawfully terminated in February because of her gender, ethnicity and political affiliation. Nemer is running for judicial office in Ohio as a Democrat in 2023.

Lawyer. Gen. Pam Bondi, seen at the White House in October, dismissed complaints from a former immigration judge who claimed he was fired without cause.

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

Bondi explained the case cabinet meeting.

“Most recently, yesterday, an immigration judge we fired sued me. That’s one of the reasons she said she was a woman. Last time I checked, I was a woman too,” she said on December 2.

Other former judges have appealed their removals through the federal Merit Systems Protection Board.

Johnson from San Francisco is one of them. He filed an appeal this month, claiming he was not given a reason for termination.

“My goal is to be reinstated,” he said. “My colleagues in the reserve, our court was energetic. It was a good place to work, despite all the pressures.”