‘Climate of fear': Immigration judges say functioning of their court system is in jeopardy due to Trump’s firings

The mass firings of the executive branch judges who run the nation’s immigration courts is leading to longer wait times for asylum seekers and other non-citizens, some of those who have been terminated said on Thursday, who described their dismissals as politically motivated. 

The Justice Department, which runs the court system that adjudicates cases for millions of immigrants each year, has taken an aggressive approach to shed more than 100 judges since President Trump took office. That marks a significant reversal from the significant growth in judges in recent years to a high of around 700, before the Trump administration began making cuts through firings and incentivized separations. 

Justice has fired the judges without cause, three impacted employees said, and despite their receiving the highest possible performance ratings. The firings have impacted the work of the remaining judges, those fired said, even as they remain committed to impartiality. 

“There's a climate of fear,” said Anam Petit, an immigration judge in Virginia who was fired in September. “Judges feel like, if they step a toe out of line right now…or they're one [asylum] grant away from being fired because of the arbitrary nature of the firings.”

The court system maintains a backlog of 3.4 million cases and immigrants are, in some instances, receiving appearance dates in 2027. To address that crushing total, the fired employees said, Justice requires far more judges, not fewer. They noted the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that Trump signed into law this year authorized the hiring of 10,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to ramp up arrests of undocumented individuals, but only increased the cap of immigration judges to 800. An increase in arrests would lead to a corresponding surge in cases before the Executive Office of Immigration Review, the Justice agency that houses the courts, and the relatively small increase in judges would likely not be sufficient to keep pace. 

“That balance is off to me,” said Ted Doolittle, who was fired from the immigration court in Hartford in September when he was one of just two judges there. “If you really wanted to get the backlog down in a reasonable time, say two or three years, you should be talking about between two and 3,000 judges.” 

They noted after their firings, their cases had to transfer to other judges. That created a significant amount of work for court staff and reset hearing dates for immigrants to accommodate their new judge's schedule. Important motions on cases sat dormant for extended periods of time as newly assigned judges tended to their existing caseloads. 

“This is not a fair way to run a court system,” said Emmett Soper, a Virginia-based immigration judge who was fired in July. “It's not fair to the people who are at the court. It's not fair to the judges who inherit these cases, and most importantly, it's not fair to the people who have cases pending in front of the immigration courts, who depend on the immigration courts being a functioning system.”

Kathryn Mattingly, an EOIR spokesperson, said reducing the case backlog is “one of the highest priorities for the agency.” While she declined to comment on personnel matters, Mattingly said EOIR has taken several steps to allow judges to decide cases more quickly including rescinding 20 policies that were "unfounded in law" or bogged down the system. 

“EOIR is committed to making further advancements to its operational efficiency, thereby helping to ensure timely justice for both parties involved and the public it serves,” she said. 

Unlike Petit and Doolittle, who were fired just before the conclusion of their probationary periods, Soper had worked as a judge in EOIR for nine years. Probationary workers are generally easier to dismiss without the usual hurdles. Soper said he received no explanation, however, other than the president was exercising his duties under Article II of the Constitution. 

Petit said she was not shocked by her firing, as those with a background in private immigration practice, like her, had a “target on your back.” 

“I called my husband afterwards and I cried," Petit said of the day she was dismissed. "I was devastated to lose a job that I really believed in and made a lot of professional and personal sacrifices to do.” 

Immigration judges have long sounded the alarm over their placement in the executive branch with political oversight, suggesting they should instead operate as an independent court under either Article I or Article III of the Constitution. Their concerns have been exacerbated by the dozens of firings—stoking fears the administration is replacing anyone standing in the way of its goals for mass deportations—as well as the new authority EOIR granted itself to appoint tap any attorney as a temporary immigration judge. Those roles were previously reserved for those with experience in the field of immigration, but the administration has leaned on its new authority to bring in hundreds of military lawyers to serve as judges in six-month stints. 

The fired judges noted the job requires significant training and it took them upwards of two years before they felt comfortable in the roles. They also pointed out that most cases before EOIR—about three-in-four—do not offer immigrants any relief from removal, meaning an empowered court system serves the interests of the administration's stated goals. 

Their jobs were also made more difficult, they said, after ICE ramped up arrests of individuals inside of immigration court buildings. Individuals giving testimony were forced to listen to cries of others being detained in hallways and immigrants before a judge often interrupted proceedings to ask if they would be similarly arrested. 

In one case, Petit said, she was prepared to issue a final order on an individual just moments before ICE arrested them. That meant that person had to restart the process in the detained docket, bogging down the system further. Soper said the arrests of individuals in his court building was “one of the most disturbing things I’ve ever witnessed.” 

“All they were doing was showing up to court like they had been told they had to do,” Soper said.