The Trump administration’s deportation campaign extends beyond ICE raids and arrests. A quieter but equally serious change is happening inside the immigration court system. Pending immigration cases get rescheduled, combined into enormous court calendars, or end without a full hearing. In June 2026 alone, immigration judges issued nearly 79,000 removal orders, while fewer than 2% of completed cases resulted in an immigrant receiving relief. More than 53,000 people received removal orders without being present in court. For many, it’s because they never received proper notice of their court date.
1. Changing Court Dates Without Reliable Notice
Immigration courts are moving some hearings from dates months or years in the future to much earlier dates. In some cases, immigrants reportedly received only a few weeks of notice. Others say they never received a new court date notice at all.
This can happen even when the person previously received paperwork showing a completely different court date. The immigrant may continue preparing for the original date, unaware that the court has moved the hearing and already expects the person to appear.
In one reported example from Kansas City, authorities placed approximately 93 people on a court calendar, giving them a median notice period of only 15 days. Fifty-six received removal orders after failing to appear. A similar docket before the same judge with approximately six months of notice resulted in only nine such orders.
The practical danger is clear: relying only on an old written hearing notice may no longer be safe.
2. Motions to Pretermit Asylum Applications
Pretermission means ending an asylum application before the immigrant receives a complete evidentiary hearing. DHS attorneys can file a Motion to Pretermit. They argue that even if we accept all statements in the asylum application as true, the facts do not legally establish eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
This means an asylum seeker may never receive the expected opportunity to testify, explain confusing facts, present witnesses, or answer the judge’s concerns. The judges may decide the case largely based on the written application and legal arguments presented at an early hearing.
3. In Absentia Removal Orders
An in absentia removal order is a deportation order due to a lack of appearance in court. Normally, the government must establish that the person received proper notice and is legally removable. However, the recent combination of accelerated scheduling, unreliable mail delivery, and massive court calendars has produced record numbers of these orders.
IIn June 2026, authorities reportedly issued approximately 53,808 in absentia removal orders, marking a 55% increase compared to May. Analysts linked over 20,000 of these orders to short-notice mega-master hearings.
Once the court enters an in absentia order, the immigrant does not simply receive another hearing. The person must file a Motion to Reopen and ask the immigration judge to rescind the order. The motion must establish lack of proper notice, qualifying exceptional circumstances, or another legally recognized reason for missing court.
Until the case reopens, the person has an active removal order and could face arrest and deportation. Read more about how the BIA handles motions to reopen after removal orders.
4. Mega-Master Calendar Hearings
A master calendar hearing was traditionally a short administrative appearance. The immigration judge would review the charges, advise the immigrant of basic rights, identify possible applications, and schedule a future individual hearing.
Courts are now scheduling what immigration lawyers call mega-master hearings, sometimes involving 70, 100, 150, or more cases assigned to one judge during a single session. In June 2026, one analysis identified 153 mega-master sessions involving more than 19,000 people. Some Chicago court dates reportedly had several mega-master calendars scheduled simultaneously, requiring as many as 611 people to arrive at the courthouse around the same time.
These calendars create overcrowding, confusion, and extremely limited time for each case. They also make it difficult for interpreters, attorneys, and court employees to determine who is present. A person may travel hours to court, wait in a crowded hallway, and still struggle to have the case properly called or addressed.
5. Safe-Third-Country Arguments
Another form of pretermission involves agreements allowing the government to argue that an asylum seeker should go to a third country instead of pursuing asylum in the United States. The third country may not be the immigrant’s country of citizenship. The person may never have lived there, traveled there, or have any family or support there.
DHS can file a Motion to Pretermit identifying a country covered by an asylum cooperative agreement. The burden may then shift to the immigrant to show that the agreement does not apply or that the person would more likely than not face persecution or torture in that third country. This creates a nearly impossible problem: immigrants must prove what would happen to them in a country they have never visited. Learn more about how courts are using third-country deportation arguments.
6. Treating Technical Problems as Abandonment or Waiver
Immigration judges are scrutinizing asylum applications for procedural and technical defects. Examples may include unanswered questions on Form I-589, missing passport pages, problems with the certificate of service, failure to submit an amendment, missing supporting documents, failure to meet a filing deadline, or insufficient factual detail in the written application.
Immigrants without attorneys may not understand what is missing or how to correct it. A technical defect can therefore become the reason the person never receives a full hearing.
7. Asylum Fee Deadlines
Immigration courts may now require an annual fee when an asylum application has been pending for at least one year. An immigration judge can issue a written order setting the payment deadline, and some reported deadlines have been extremely short.
Paying online may not be enough. The applicant should save the receipt and submit proof of payment to the immigration court so the judge knows they paid the fee. Failure to pay may result in the asylum portion of the case being denied or dismissed. The danger is that a person may never receive the payment order, may not understand which agency must receive the payment, or may pay without submitting the receipt to the court.
8. Ending Court Cases and Moving People Into Faster Deportation Procedures
DHS may ask an immigration judge to dismiss certain court proceedings. At first glance, dismissal may sound positive because the immigration court case is ending. But dismissal can expose some immigrants to expedited removal, a separate process in which immigration officers rather than immigration judges may order certain people deported without a regular court hearing.
Immigrants have also faced detention immediately after dismissal of their court proceedings. This tactic can work together with courthouse enforcement. People must appear in court to avoid an in absentia removal order. However, appearing may place them in the same location as ICE officers waiting to make arrests. Fear of courthouse arrest may then cause others to miss their hearings, creating the basis for additional in absentia removal orders. Learn more about what happens when ICE reopens closed deportation cases.
What Immigrants With Court Cases Should Do Now
Anyone with an immigration court case should take these developments seriously. Check the EOIR court system online and by telephone at least once every week at acis.eoir.justice.gov. Do not rely exclusively on an old written hearing notice.
Additional steps every immigrant with a pending case should take:
- File Form EOIR-33 immediately after every change of address
- Open all mail from the immigration court, DHS, ICE, and the Board of Immigration Appeals
- Keep screenshots showing the listed hearing date
- Review Form I-589 for unanswered questions, missing pages, and incomplete information
- Pay required asylum fees on time and submit the receipt to the court
- Obtain a copy of every DHS motion and court order
- Seek legal advice immediately after receiving a Motion to Pretermit, an order ending the case, or an in absentia removal order
- Never assume that a dismissed court case means the danger of deportation has ended
Immigration Court Is No Longer a Passive Waiting Process
For years, many immigrants believed that having a court date far in the future meant they had time to find an attorney and prepare their evidence. That assumption has become dangerous. Cases can now move forward with little warning. A missed immigration court hearing notice, unpaid fee, incomplete answer, or unexpected government motion may lead to a removal order before the immigrant ever presents the full story.
Shepelsky Law Group represents immigrants in removal proceedings, asylum cases, motions to reopen, and appeals. If your court date changed, DHS filed a Motion to Pretermit, or you discovered a removal order put into place without your knowledge, contact our office immediately at (718) 769-6352 to schedule a paid consultation.