The immigration court system is supposed to provide every person in removal proceedings with a meaningful opportunity to present their case, submit evidence, request available immigration relief, and receive an individualized decision based on the law. But a recent NOTUS investigation raises serious concerns about whether growing administrative pressure on immigration judges is interfering with that process.
According to NOTUS [NOTUS is short for News of the United States, a Washington, D.C.-based news organization launched in 2024 that focuses on U.S. government, politics, and public policy, with nonpartisan reporting and deeply sourced political and government coverage), current and former immigration judges say that major changes implemented by the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice have reduced judges’ discretion and placed increasing pressure on them to move cases faster.
Judges are under pressure to do Trump officials’ bidding and not be fair and just in their decisions, nor to follow the rule of law.
Approximately 125 immigration judges have reportedly been fired since President Trump returned to office, while roughly another 100 have retired or departed through separation programs. More than one-quarter of the immigration judge workforce has therefore left the government. Some judges interviewed by NOTUS said the firings have created an atmosphere in which judges worry that decisions inconsistent with current administration policy could jeopardize their jobs.
That concern goes directly to the fairness of the immigration court process. Immigration judges routinely decide cases involving asylum, cancellation of removal, adjustment of status, waivers, bond, and other forms of relief where the facts and applicable law must be carefully considered. According to the judges interviewed by NOTUS, fear of discipline or termination may affect how freely judges exercise the discretion that immigration law gives them. Some former judges reported that the pressure has made it increasingly difficult to decide cases independently.
The pressure is not limited to how cases are decided. It also affects how quickly cases are being pushed through the system. NOTUS reports that immigration judges are facing new requirements to issue decisions faster and may have little control over their own calendars. On some mornings, EOIR has reportedly placed as many as 150 cases on a single judge’s docket for administrative action. Asylum seekers may receive limited notice, and a person who fails to appear can be ordered removed in absentia. These conditions raise obvious due-process concerns when an immigrant’s ability to remain in the United States may depend on having enough time to receive notice, obtain counsel, gather evidence, prepare witnesses, and present a complete legal case.
The consequences are already visible in the numbers. According to the report, removal orders increased substantially during the spring and jumped approximately 30% in June 2026. At the same time, the immigration court backlog has fallen from a peak of approximately four million pending cases to around 3.2 million. Reducing a massive backlog is an important goal, but efficiency cannot replace due process. Moving cases faster is not necessarily an improvement if immigrants are given less opportunity to prepare their cases or judges feel constrained in independently applying the law.
There are also concerns about changes in the composition and experience of the immigration bench. EOIR has hired 190 immigration judges during fiscal year 2026, including 118 since May. NOTUS reports that nearly 90% of those more recent hires previously worked for ICE, the military, or prosecutorial offices, while relatively few came from private immigration practices representing immigrants. A current immigration judge also told NOTUS that newer judges are receiving less training than judges traditionally received, raising concerns that rushed or legally incorrect decisions could later result in additional appeals and remands.
The Department of Justice rejects the suggestion that these policies improperly influence immigration judges. DOJ told NOTUS that it is working to restore integrity to the immigration system and protect national security and public safety. But regardless of the government’s stated purpose, the accounts from current and former judges raise an important legal-process question: Can immigration courts provide meaningful due process when judges themselves believe that their employment may depend on how they decide cases?
For immigrants, these developments make preparation more important than ever. Anyone in removal proceedings should closely monitor hearing dates, immediately update the Immigration Court after any change of address, appear at every scheduled hearing, retain qualified immigration counsel when possible, and begin collecting supporting evidence well before the court requires it. An immigration case should not be prepared on the assumption that multiple continuances or additional opportunities will necessarily be available.
If you or a family member is in Immigration Court, has received a Notice to Appear, is facing deportation, or needs to determine what defenses to removal may be available, contact Shepelsky Law Group at Tel: (718)769-6352 or by booking your consultation at www.shepelskylaw.com directly. Our legal team can evaluate your case, identify available forms of relief, prepare evidence and legal arguments, and represent you throughout removal proceedings. Call Shepelsky Law Group or visit our website to schedule an immigration consultation.
Source: NOTUS, Deportations Are Spiking. Judges Say Their Hands Are Being Forced, August 18, 202: