Fired Bay Area Immigration Judges Say Trump Is ‘Instilling Fear’ in Courts

(BAY AREA) Fired immigration judges from the Bay Area say the Trump administration is pushing them out to tighten control of the nation’s immigration courts, as more than 100 immigration judges have been removed or resigned since January 2025. In July alone, 15 judges were told their jobs would end on July 22, often at the close of their two-year probation, with no explanation. The Executive Office for Immigration Review, or EOIR, now has about 600 immigration judges, down from more than 700 earlier this year, even as the administration seeks faster deportations and fewer court hearings for migrants, especially asylum seekers.

The union that represents immigration judges, the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), says many remaining judges feel pressure and fear. Some of the dismissed judges are speaking out, calling the shake-up an “attack on the rule of law” and warning it will make the courts less fair. Illinois Senator Dick Durbin has condemned the firing of Judge Peyton as political retaliation and says Congress must watch how these removals are used to influence cases.

The administration frames the changes as a way to speed outcomes and reduce the backlog. EOIR, a Justice Department agency that runs the courts and hires judges, reports fewer pending cases — from about 4.1 million at the start of 2025 to 3.8 million by midyear — but much of that drop comes from case dismissals and faster removals rather than more trial capacity. With fewer judges and stricter rules, lawyers across the country say the system is moving toward quick deportations with fewer chances for people to be heard. EOIR’s role and basic court information are posted on the Justice Department’s site: https://www.justice.gov/eoir.

Policy Shifts Reshaping the Courts

The Trump administration has rolled out policy changes that restrict what immigration judges can do and limit options for people in court:

• Bond hearings ended for detained immigrants. Judges can no longer review whether someone should be released while their case is pending. This means people may stay in custody for months or even years as their cases move through the system.
• A strict six-month deadline now applies to asylum decisions. Judges are ordered to decide quickly and are allowed to deny asylum without a hearing, cutting off the opportunity to present full evidence.
• A new $100 fee for asylum applications has been imposed, creating a cost barrier for people fleeing harm.
• Courthouse and sensitive-location arrests by ICE have expanded. Agents are making arrests in places once seen as off-limits, including courthouses, schools, places of worship, and hospitals.
• More expedited removals are taking place, sometimes within days.

Fired judges say these rules are designed to shrink due process. Many of those pushed out were still in probation, making them easier to remove. According to IFPTE, the message to those who remain is clear: work faster, issue more denials, and avoid drawn-out hearings.

Human Impact and Backlog Pressures

On paper, the backlog has dipped. In practice, the courts face rising pressure. With about 600 judges for millions of cases, each judge carries a high caseload. The elimination of bond hearings means detention times will grow, particularly in Texas, which holds most detention beds. For families, that can mean parents held far from children and urgent medical needs left to detention centers.

Lawyers warn that people with strong claims will struggle to find counsel in time to meet tight deadlines. Practical effects for migrants and families include:

• Longer detention periods without bond review
• Greater difficulty collecting evidence (police reports, medical records) under tight timelines
• Increased barriers to finding counsel, especially for detained clients in remote facilities
• Greater risk of in absentia removal orders if people avoid hearings due to courthouse arrest fears

Step-by-step sequence of current changes

1. ICE arrests more people at courthouses and other sensitive places.
2. Detained immigrants lose access to bond hearings and remain in custody throughout their cases.
3. Asylum applicants must pay $100 to apply.
4. Judges must decide asylum cases within six months, or they can deny without a hearing.
5. Expedited removal is used more often, with some deportations occurring within as little as three days.
6. Fewer immigration judges remain; those who do handle larger dockets and face pressure to move faster.

These changes raise serious fairness concerns. A parent escaping gang threats may not be able to gather necessary documentation within weeks. A detained person may not find a willing lawyer to travel to a remote detention center. The risk: people with valid claims deported without a full review.

Legal and Political Pushback

Critics in Congress and legal groups say the judge firings cross a line. Senator Durbin has called the removal of Judge Peyton an abuse of power and urges the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate whether politics steered decisions. The New York City Bar Association and other legal bodies argue the executive branch is reshaping the courts to favor removals, raising constitutional concerns.

Fired judges, now free to speak publicly, say the goal is to instill fear and control the bench. The administration’s defenders point to the backlog drop and the need to tighten the system after years of strain. Yet, even with fewer pending cases, the pipeline remains massive while the number of judges is falling.

A legislative cap of 800 judges by November 2028 limits growth, meaning the court system will likely remain stretched for years unless Congress acts.

Legal Challenges and Advocacy Response

Analysis by VisaVerge.com and advocacy groups predicts worsening conditions for asylum seekers and detained immigrants under these rules. Several legal aid organizations, including long-standing groups such as HIAS and the National Immigration Law Center, are preparing test cases that focus on:

• Access to counsel
• The right to be heard
• Challenges to expedited removal and courthouse arrests

These organizations expect multiple legal challenges and are mobilizing to defend due process and access to representation.

“The message to those who remain is clear: work faster, issue more denials, and avoid drawn-out hearings.” — IFPTE summary of the current climate

Practical Advice for People in Proceedings

For people currently in immigration proceedings, advocates and lawyers recommend immediate steps:

• Prepare documents early and keep multiple copies.
• Contact legal aid organizations as soon as possible.
• Keep proof of ties to family and community even if bond is not available.
• Track court dates closely and retain copies of all filings.
• Be aware that missing a filing or deadline under the six-month asylum timeline can effectively end a case.

Local Impact: Bay Area and Beyond

The Bay Area has long been a hub for immigration cases, with strong networks of public defenders and nonprofit clinics. Even so, attorneys report struggling to staff detained dockets while meeting new speed demands. When a judge is removed and a docket reassigned, hearings are rescheduled, witnesses must be rebooked, and cases can slip into limbo. For detained clients, every delay means more time behind bars.

The administration says these steps will restore order. But inside the courts the effect is apparent: fewer immigration judges, stricter timelines, and faster deportations. Pending lawsuits may reshape parts of the policy, but there’s no sign of a broad pause. With arrests growing at courthouses and other sensitive spots, fear of showing up for a hearing may keep people away—leading to in absentia removal orders and quick deportations.

Broader Implications

The EOIR system, housed at the Justice Department, was designed to be neutral, even though immigration judges are not Article III judges with life tenure. The current shake-up tests that neutrality.

• Judges who remain describe a climate of warning and haste.
• Fired judges say they will continue to fight in court and in public.
• Families on both sides of the border will live with the results for the foreseeable future.

The situation continues to evolve as legal challenges proceed and Congress watches potential political influence over the courts.