Something profound is happening inside America’s immigration courts — and most Americans have no idea. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice are no longer openly recruiting “immigration judges.”
The job listings now reportedly refer to them as “deportation judges,” and the government recruitment ad reportedly even features Judge Dredd — the fictional comic book character known for acting as judge, jury, and executioner.
That may sound symbolic. But symbols matter; words matter; titles matter. And in a legal system built on the principle of impartial justice, the language used to describe judges says a great deal about what the system expects from them.
That may sound like semantics; it is not. Because words matter. Titles matter. And in a legal system built on the principle of impartial justice, the language used to describe judges says a great deal about what the system expects from them.
Immigration judges are supposed to weigh evidence, hear testimony, and determine whether someone qualifies for relief under the law. They are not supposed to begin with a predetermined outcome. Yet even former immigration judges are sounding the alarm.
“To call an immigration judge a deportation judge kind of suggests that the outcome has already been pre-determined,” former immigration judge Jeremiah Johnson said during last week’s “Speak Up for Justice” forum. “When in fact, there’s a lot of weighing of evidence, and the judge has to also and does grant relief at times.”
His comments come amid an unprecedented upheaval inside the immigration court system itself. According to judges and union officials who spoke publicly on May 21st, more than 200 immigration judges have been fired, pushed out, or forced to resign over the past year.
Some reportedly received termination emails without explanation. Others were escorted out of courtrooms mid-hearing. Entire courts have been gutted. San Francisco, once one of the busiest immigration courts in the country, reportedly went from 21 judges to just two before closing entirely, leaving roughly 120,000 pending cases in limbo.
Mimi Tsankov, former President, National Association of Immigration Judges, stated: “One of the things I think people are very concerned about is the manner in which judges were fired, because it speaks to a broader concern about the institution and how much we can really trust the outcomes of that institution when judges are being fired with no notice and given no reason.”
At the same time, the immigration court backlog continues to explode. More than 3.5 million cases are now pending nationwide, and the judges who remain describe overwhelming pressure. Some are reportedly scheduled for up to 100 master calendar hearings a day, plus individual hearings that function like bench trials.
That is not just overwork; it is a system under strain. The consequences extend far beyond the judges themselves.
Immigrants are increasingly afraid to appear in court because of arrests taking place at courthouses. Former judges described a “chilling effect,” with immigrants skipping hearings out of fear they could be detained immediately afterward. Others described hearing tasers going off in courthouse hallways while trying to conduct hearings.
This is not what most Americans imagine when they think of a courtroom dedicated to due process. And perhaps most troubling is the growing concern that immigration judges are being pressured to follow executive policy over independent legal judgment.
“There’s this additional pressure that’s being put on judges now to follow policy… over even the law sometimes,” said Holly D’Andrea, president of the National Association of Immigration Judges. “However, our ultimate job is to follow the law.”
That distinction matters because immigration courts may be administrative courts, but for millions of people, they still determine life-changing outcomes: deportation, asylum, detention, family separation, or safety.
And once public confidence in judicial independence begins to erode, the damage spreads far beyond immigration. This is no longer just about border policy. It is about whether America’s immigration courts are still functioning as courts — or becoming something else entirely.
Because when judges themselves begin warning that due process is under attack, the country should be paying attention.
As Paul R. Kiesel, founder of Speak Up for Justice and partner at Kiesel Law, warned: “What is happening to immigration judges is not isolated. It’s a bellwether. If it can happen in one corner of the executive branch, it can spread to others. It can spread to judges who work in Social Security, labor, and other agencies, and they’re all watching very closely and asking a simple question: Are we next?”
Felicia J. Persaud is the founder and publisher of NewsAmericasNow.com, the only daily syndicated newswire and digital platform dedicated exclusively to Caribbean Diaspora and Black immigrant news across the Americas.