San Francisco immigration court shuts down after purge of judges, leaving asylum cases in chaos
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — In San Francisco’s main immigration court, there are no more immigrants awaiting decisions and no lawyers arguing.
The court, which had 21 judges when President Donald Trump was sworn in last year, had only two judges left when it closed on May 1. The rest had been fired, retired or resigned. Purge in the White House federal immigration judges.
closing one more reflections of turmoil This has overwhelmed the immigration court system as the administration looks for ways to clear a massive backlog of 3.8 million asylum cases and deport as many people as possible.
Asylum rejection rates This increase increased after the administration dismissed nearly 100 judges it deemed too liberal and approved their replacements with hundreds of military lawyers. Immigrants are arrested upon arrival at courthouses or government offices for pre-planned depositions.
But amid the nationwide uprising, San Francisco became the first major city left without a primary immigration court, leaving chaos and dysfunction in a region long known for its friendliness to asylum seekers. The remaining two judges will work in another federal building in the city but will be part of the immigration court across the bay.
Court insiders say this reputation may have led to the company’s collapse.
“It was a vibrant legal scene, and so I think if you want to target a court you have to look at what San Francisco stands for,” said Jeremiah Johnson, who was an immigration judge in the city until he was fired in November. He is currently vice president of the National Association of Immigration Judges.
Most of the court’s 117,000 immigration cases were moved to a courthouse in Concord, a city about 30 miles (48 kilometers) away, that opened two years ago to help San Francisco’s backlog of cases. However, the turmoil also reached that city. The courthouse had 11 judges at the beginning of 2025, down to five following a series of layoffs. Even before San Francisco cases were transferred, there was a caseload of 60,000.
San Francisco immigration court, which has the third-highest number of asylum cases in the country, has long been considered one of the most convenient courts for people seeking asylum. From 2019 to 2024, nearly 75% of petitioners received some form of relief, compared with 43% nationally, according to data compiled by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a nonprofit data research center based at Syracuse University.
That’s partly because San Francisco has one of the nation’s highest rates of legal representation for immigrants, with its extensive network of pro-immigrant organizations and free or low-cost legal services.
The Executive Office of Immigration Review, the Justice Department branch that oversees immigration courts, announced in March that it would close the San Francisco courthouse in 2027 and move cases to Concord as a cost-saving measure. But the end came early after nearly all of San Francisco’s judges left or were fired. The Enforcement Office did not make a detailed statement about the changes, only stating that it decided not to renew the lease on behalf of the court and did not comment on personnel matters.
Tight security in Concord courts
Security is tight at the Concord courthouse, perhaps because of the influx of new cases. Armed security guards ask everyone if they are carrying weapons or explosives and watch as everyone turns off their cell phones. Even coffee is not allowed inside. Only water is accepted, and only if it is in a clear bottle.
Judah Lakin, an immigration attorney who lives in Oakland and also teaches at UC Berkeley School of Law, said the San Francisco court closure makes cases more time-consuming because it makes it harder for his clients, who often travel hours away, to reach Concord by public transportation.
A recent 10-minute hearing in Concord took more than two hours to travel, he said.
But beyond logistics, Lakin said the chaos in immigration courts under the Trump administration has created a tense court atmosphere. Mass layoffs led to last-minute hearing cancellations, cases were reset with little notice, and clients were often left in prolonged legal limbo, leaving them vulnerable to deportation.
He said one of his clients was granted temporary asylum by a judge and was later dismissed before signing the decision. The case was assigned to a second judge, who was also dismissed. Now his client is still waiting for their third judge.
“Whether it’s judges being fired, hearings being canceled, your clients being arrested, things that used to be standard and routine being rejected, the ground is constantly shifting under your feet,” Lakin said.
“I think it’s intentional. It’s by design. It’s part of the strategy,” he added.
San Francisco’s immigration court is now disbanded
The San Francisco immigration court was one of the first courts in the country to hire judges with nonprosecutor backgrounds; many had previous experience working with immigrants at nonprofit organizations or defending them in court.
Dana Leigh Marks, a former San Francisco immigration judge who retired in 2021 after 35 years on the bench and was among the first judges in the country to be hired from private practice, said it was “heartbreaking” to see the court close.
He thinks the Trump administration’s decision to close the largest immigration court in Northern California is part of an effort to undermine the legal process and eventually eliminate the path to asylum.
“These are all part of the ways, big and small, that the Trump administration is trying to remove noncitizens from the country,” he said.
Johnson, the fired San Francisco judge, was appointed during the first Trump administration. He thinks he was targeted for granting asylum in 89 percent of the cases he heard about.
“You can’t fire judges if you don’t agree with the way they handle a case, that’s not how courts work. If you disagree, you appeal that decision,” he said.
Johnson, who is vice president of the National Association of Immigration Judges, defended his criminal record, noting that over eight years, only 10 of his cases were appealed by the Department of Homeland Security, and very few were sent back for further hearings by the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Unlike federal courts, where there are strict rules of procedure and judges have life terms, the Justice Department runs the immigration courts and the attorney general can remove judges with fewer restrictions.
At the beginning of Trump’s second term, there were 754 immigration judges across the country. According to data collected by the judges’ union, there are currently about 600 of them, including some temporary judges. Widespread courthouse arrests of immigrants have resulted in hundreds of people not even showing up for hearings, leading to deportation orders in absentia.
Nidaa Pervaiz recently came to Concord court to represent a client from Nepal. In some ways, he prefers the new courthouse because it’s closer to home.
But he said he and his customers are already feeling the impact of the changes. Fewer judges leads to fewer hearings. This means further delays for clients whose paperwork expires before they can appear before a judge.
“Their entire lives are at stake and they are coming to make a plea for their future,” he said.
