logo
Trump fires more immigration judges in what some suspect is a move to bend courts to his will

Trump fires more immigration judges in what some suspect is a move to bend courts to his will

Yahoo23-04-2025

The Justice Department's move last week to fire at least eight immigration judges, including four from California, is raising fears among Democratic leaders, academics and others that the Trump Administration is chipping away at due process protections for immigrants.
"These firings made no sense," said Matt Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, the union representing the nation's 700 immigration judges. "When you do the simple math, each judge does 500 to 700 cases a year. Most of them are deportation cases. So what he's effectively done is he's increased the already huge backlog that the immigration courts face."
The Executive Office for Immigration Review, or EOIR, which runs the immigration court system, fired at least two dozen more immigration judges and supervising judges in February, including five from California courts, according to the judge's union. The administration also eliminated five in leadership positions at the EOIR and removed nine Board of Immigration Appeals judges appointed under Biden. An additional 85 professional court staff members — including 19 judges, interpreters, legal assistants and IT specialists took buyouts after receiving a "Fork in the Road" email that offered federal workers 'deferred resignations."
In a memo sent out after the February firings, EOIR acting Director Sirce E. Owen said immigration judges do not have "multiple layers of removal restrictions" or civil service protection that had previously been given to them.
She referenced Justice Department Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle's statements that the agency was restoring "accountability so that the Executive Branch officials answer to the President and to the people."
"Unelected and constitutionally unaccountable (administrative law judges) have exercised immense power for far too long," Mizelle stated.
Biggs speculated that judges appointed to replace those who left could be "political loyalists."
"Do they intend to fire immigration judges because they don't rule on cases the way Donald Trump wants them to rule? he asked. "You can easily see a scenario where that could happen."
Thirteen judges who were in a probationary status have filed a class appeal to the U.S. Merit System Protection Board in Atlanta, claiming they were wrongfully terminated.
The Department of Justice did not respond to requests for comment.
Read more: As children are pulled into immigration court, many must fend for themselves
Unlike the federal district courts, the immigration courts lack the same level of judicial independence and their decisions can ultimately be overturned by the U.S. attorney general, though previous administrations have not widely used that power, said Alison Peck, author of "The Accidental History of the U.S. Immigration Courts: War, Fear, and the Roots of Dysfunction."
Legal scholars say the changes should be viewed against the larger backdrop of the administration's efforts to speed up the removal of immigrants. This month, the EOIR called on judges to terminate asylum cases in which applicants were deemed "legally deficient." The policy memo allows judges to fast-track and close cases without a hearing.
"They're experimenting with different ways in which to expel immigrants," said Sameer Ashar, a clinical professor of law at UC Irvine. He pointed to three recently detained university students who have been taken to a remote detention center in Louisiana, where they don't have easy access to representation. The administration invoked a wartime law to deport dozens more individuals who were alleged members of a Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua, to El Salvador last month.
"We should regard all these efforts as experiments. In their effort to bring expedited removal to all, to the whole system," Ashar said. "It's part of the administration's attack on extending due process to immigrants in the U.S."
President Trump wrote on social media Monday that not everyone should be given the same rights before a judge, lashing out at the Supreme Court after it ordered a temporary pause on deportations under the Alien Enemies Act.
"We cannot give everyone a trial, because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years," he stated. "We would need hundreds of thousands of trials for the hundreds of thousands of illegals we are sending out of the Country. Such a thing is not possible to do."
The immigration courts are bottlenecked with 3.7 million pending cases. In California, according to Syracuse University's TRAC database, there are nearly 400,000 pending cases, with the state's largest backlog in San Francisco, where three judges were removed, and second largest in Concord, where another three judges were removed.
The backlog, says Lora Ries, director of the Border Security and Immigration Center at the conservative Heritage Foundation, is partly due to the numerous hearings and extensions associated with immigration cases that can drag on for years. The administration is right to fast-track them, she said.
"The amount of due process that deportable aliens get is, what I would say, excessive," she said.
Ranking members of the Senate and House judiciary committees, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill. ) and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md), along with dozens of other Democratic lawmakers, urged the administration to reverse course in a letter sent in March. They asked U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi to explain the administration's logic for firing so many judges and to lay out the depth of cuts inside the agency.
The lawmakers wrote that the absence of experienced assistant chief judges will harm the most pressing court cases — such as those dealing with detained individuals, families and children with credible fears of returning to their home countries — and further slow down any hearings for migrants applying to come in from Mexico, under the Remain in Mexico policy.
"These changes will lessen the quality of immigration case decisions and the speed at which immigration cases are adjudicated," the letter stated. One of the judges fired was in the middle of an asylum hearing and received notice via email and had to abruptly leave the proceedings, the letter stated.
Bondi has yet to respond, according to representatives for Durbin and U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Immigration subcommittee.
"It is another tactic in the Trump administration's anti-immigrant, mass-deportation agenda that attempts to reshape our immigration system, including denying due process by increasing delays for individuals who are waiting for their day in court,' Padilla said in a statement 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 most recent firing of immigration judges and professional staff members only makes matters worse."
Inside the court system, people are nervous, said Kerry Doyle. Appointed during the Biden administration as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorney, Doyle was just about to complete a one-year judge training program in Massachusetts in February when she got an email that she would be let go.
Before being chosen as a judge, she had been a target of conservative groups. The American Accountability Foundation, a project of the Heritage Foundation, placed Doyle on a "DHS bureaucrat watchlist" that aimed to expose career staff in "league with left-wing open border groups."
"It's really hit the other judges in my old court hard that I was fired," she said. "People are doing really, 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."
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Mass. Sen. Warren: DOGE accessed ‘sensitive' student loan data at Education Dept., calls for probe
Mass. Sen. Warren: DOGE accessed ‘sensitive' student loan data at Education Dept., calls for probe

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Mass. Sen. Warren: DOGE accessed ‘sensitive' student loan data at Education Dept., calls for probe

U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she wants to know how the quasi-governmental Department of Government Efficiency gained access to 'sensitive' student loan information at the U.S. Department of Education. On Monday, Warren and U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, both Democrats, called for the agency's acting inspector general to find out how that breach happened. They were joined by Democratic senators from eight states, including U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut. Warren said lawmakers learned of the potential breach of systems at Federal Student Aid after DOGE, which was helmed until recently by tech titan Elon Musk, infiltrated the agency. In response, Education Department officials revealed that DOGE workers 'supported' a review of the FSA's contracts. As a part of that review, one employee was granted 'read-only' access to two internal systems that held sensitive personal information about borrowers. The agency said it had since revoked that access. But, according to Warren, it did not explain why that access had been revoked, or whether the employee had continued access to other databases. 'Because of the [Education] department's refusal to provide full and complete information, the full extent of DOGE's role and influence at ED remains unknown,' the lawmakers wrote in a June 8 letter to René L. Rocque, the agency's acting inspector general. That 'lack of clarity is not only frustrating for borrowers but also dangerous for the future of an agency that handles an extensive student loan portfolio and a range of federal aid programs for higher education,' the lawmakers continued. Warren, Markey and their colleagues have called on Roque's office to determine whether the department adhered to the Federal Privacy Act, which dictates how the government can collect and use personal information. They also asked Roque to 'determine the impact of DOGE's new plans to consolidate Americans' personal information across government databases.' 'It won't end well for Trump' if he does this amid LA protests, ex-GOP rep says All Ivy League schools are supporting Harvard lawsuit — except these 2 Embassies directed to resume processing Harvard University student visas Over 12,000 Harvard alums lend weight to court battle with Trump in new filing Markey: Trump using National Guard in LA to distract from big cuts in 'Big Beautiful Bill' Read the original article on MassLive.

Two Illinois senators help introduce bill on gun industry negligence
Two Illinois senators help introduce bill on gun industry negligence

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Two Illinois senators help introduce bill on gun industry negligence

WASHINGTON, D.C. (WTWO/WAWV)— Two Illinois Senators helped introduce a bill Monday that they believe will hold gun companies and sellers more liable in court. Senator Tammy Duckworth(D-IL) and U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) along with the help of many others including senators, U.S. Representatives, and and more than 80 members of congress introduced the bill Monday. The bill is entitled the Equal Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act. They believe the bill will ensure victims of gun violence can get their day in court. It will also repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) that was passed by Congress in 2005. The PLCAA gives the gun industry a unique legal liability shield that protects manufacturers from lawsuits. They believe that repealing this will allow gun companies and gun sellers to face liability for acts of gun violence that threaten public safety. 'The needless gun violence that too many Illinoisans—and Americans across the country—experience is heartbreaking and not reflective of the kind of future my daughters or any of our young people deserve,' Duckworth said. 'That's why I'm proud to join my colleagues in introducing the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, which will hold gun manufacturers accountable and bring justice to grieving families. I'll never stop working for commonsense gun safety reforms.' Congress originally stated that the reason for the PLCAA was that it was necessary to protect the gun industry from frivolous lawsuits. Due to this, though, the press release from the Senate states that numerous cases of gun violence victims around the nation have been dismissed based on the PLCAA, even when gun dealers acted in a way that would be negligent for other products. 'It's unconscionable that the gun industry is shielded from the consequences of negligent behavior that would result in liability if this were any other product,' said Durbin. 'Gun dealers and manufacturers do not deserve special treatment, and certainly not at the expense of the communities that are plagued by gun violence. By repealing this unjustifiable legal liability shield, this bill will allow victims of gun violence to seek justice and have their day in court.' The legislation is endorsed by Brady, GIFFORDS Law Center, Everytown for Gun Safety, March for Our Lives, Guns Down America, Newtown Action Alliance, and Sandy Hook Promise Action Fund. For full wording of the bill, you can click here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump neutered Justice Department watchdogs that were there to prevent politically motivated prosecutions
Trump neutered Justice Department watchdogs that were there to prevent politically motivated prosecutions

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump neutered Justice Department watchdogs that were there to prevent politically motivated prosecutions

Donald Trump's DOGE-ification of the federal government added a key team at the Department of Justice to its list of victims in a pair of moves that greased the wheels for his adminsitration to use the agency to go after Democratic members of Congress. The Justice Department's public integrity section (PIN) underwent a series of key changes this year at the direction of Trump-appointed Attorney General Pam Bondi, who has overseen the agency as it charged a Democratic member of Congress, Monica McIver, with assault after she was repeatedly confronted by ICE agents during a legally permitted congressional oversight visit to a detention facility in Newark. McIver's charging is one of several instances where the Trump-led Department of Justice has brazenly defied the tradition of independence from the White House that agency officials typically follow. Under Bondi's leadership, the agency has quickly transitioned into an arm of the White House, focused on the president's priorities and willing to target his political enemies. Other targets of that trend have been a Milwaukee judge, arrested and charged with allegedly preventing immigration authorities from arresting a man outside of her courtroom by leading him out a back entrance after his hearing concluded, and Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident who was deported to a hellish prison in El Salvador in violation of a court ruling. Abrego Garcia was charged with trafficking migrants last week after the federal government relented in a weeks-long battle with the courts and returned him to the United States. A federal prosecutor in Tennessee, Ben Schrader, resigned over his concerns that the charges were filed for political reasons, according to ABC News. McIver's charging shortly followed the agency-wide suspension of a rule which previously required prosecutors to obtain approval from the PIN before members of Congress could be criminally charged — a safeguard previously in place to prevent targeting of the administration's political opponents on spurious charges, Reuters reported. McIver was charged with assault after being involved in a scuffle with ICE agents outside of a Newark detention facility; video shows her making physical contact with an agent, but possibly by accident. The agency has not released an explanation for why agents engaged in a scuffle with McIver at the scene at all, given that the agency is, by law, prohibited from using its funding in any way to prevent members of Congress from conducting oversight visits. Newark's mayor, Ras Baraka, was arrested at the scene. The Independent reached out for comment regarding the suspension of the rule regarding criminal cases which involve members of Congress, and to inquire about any other reductions to the PIN division's responsibilities. As part of staff reductions across the whole of the federal government, the PIN team was also hit. The decision of federal prosecutors to drop an investigation into New York's Democratic mayor sparked a wave of resignations at the division, with departing attorneys having been asked to give the order to end the probe after federal prosecutors in New York refused. What followed was a gutting of the PIN section, which is now a fraction of its former size, according to multiple reports, and no longer handling cases directly. Just five prosecutors were directly assigned to the division by mid-March, down from 30. The suspension of the rule in May and the other reported erosions of PIN's authority marks a serious reduction in a key safeguard that the agency implemented in 1976 after the Watergate scandal. At the time, another Republican president leaned on the Justice Department to influence an investigation into a break-in at the Democratic Party's headquarters and the extent of the Oval Office's knowledge of the plot. Donald Trump, in an executive order, directed Bondi to review all DOJ teams with 'civil or criminal enforcement authority ' and identify whether individual divisions were, by Trump's standards, used for political purposes by the Biden administration. Biden officials have denied any weaponization of the DOJ, with prosecutions of the president's son Hunter and a Democratic senator from New Jersey as evidence to point to. The stated purpose of that executive action was to end the 'weaponization' of the Justice Department and other agencies. But over the course of six months, the DOJ's greatest tool for preventing that possibility has all but vanished. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democratic senator from Rhode Island, wrote to Bondi in March about the dismantling of the PIN division, but his office has not released a statement on the matter since. The DoJ issued no public statement in response. 'Certain political appointees in this Department of Justice have already proven they put President Trump's political interests over their duties as prosecutors and as lawyers. Multiple Public Integrity Section attorneys resigned rather than endorse then-Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove's unethical quid pro quo in dropping the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams,' wrote the senator. He added: 'If the Trump administration's goal was to encourage corruption and abuse of office, it is hard to know what it would do differently.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store