WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three former immigration judges dismissed without explanation during the Trump administration warned at a National Press Club panel this week that continued firings and understaffing in immigration courts threaten constitutional due process rights and are accelerating a crisis already straining the federal system.
According to the National Press Club, 82 immigration judges have been removed without stated cause since January 2020, reducing the number of active judges from about 700 to roughly 600, even as pending cases have surged past an estimated 3.4 million.
Participating in the panel were Ted Doolittle, a former immigration judge in Connecticut; Anam R. Petit, a former Georgetown Law professor who served as an immigration judge in Virginia; Emmet Soper, a former Department of Defense official who served nine years as an immigration judge; and Matt Briggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE).
Doolittle described immigration courts as “one of the most overburdened court systems, state, municipal, or federal, in the United States.” He said that in Connecticut “there are two judges for 46,000 cases.”
Doolittle emphasized that the immigration court system is housed within the Department of Justice and under direct control of the executive branch. “One thing that is highly unusual is that the opinions of the judges can be reviewed, and indeed changed, by the executive branch,” he said. He added that the Attorney General can overrule any immigration judge’s decision and argued the system “lacks structural independence.”
Petit agreed, saying the public incorrectly assumes immigration courts operate with the same independence as Article III courts. She warned that the growing backlog is poorly understood by the public, adding, “There is a crushing backlog in immigration court… There are not enough judges to hear those cases.”
Petit said the shortage of judges threatens constitutional protections. “We have an administration that is placing an emphasis on case completions, but we have to balance that against the constitutional right to due process that every person has in immigration court.”
Soper explained that most cases require extensive documentation and long hearings, noting that final decisions are commonly delivered orally and “can last anywhere from 20 minutes up to 45 minutes, even an hour.”
Doolittle said even under optimal conditions, a judge can finish only “a maximum of three [cases] in one day, and that’s pushing it.” He criticized staffing provisions in the recently passed “Big Beautiful Bill,” saying they overwhelmingly added enforcement personnel instead of judges. He argued that two to three thousand judges would be required to reduce the backlog within “two or three years.”
He said expanding access to counsel through “federal public defenders or court-appointed counsel” would improve fairness and reduce delays.
Petit said there is “universal interest in reducing the backlog” because delays undermine evidence. “Evidence can get stale; it gets harder and harder to find documentation the longer time has passed.”
The panelists stressed that the crisis is not partisan. Briggs noted prior bipartisan support for hiring judges and reducing the case backlog. “Whether this administration likes it or not… immigrants in this country are entitled to due process… If you are denying illegal immigrants due process, it’s not too far of a stretch that you will start denying your own citizens due process,” he said.
Soper said the loss of judges has destabilized proceedings. “It throws everything into chaos for a non-citizen,” he said, adding that it is “not a fair way to run a court system.”
Each former judge recounted learning they had been fired. Petit said morale collapsed afterward. “It was debilitating for morale; no one felt safe. Even judges with long tenures were uncomfortable.”
Doolittle said he received no explanation except that the attorney general determined his continued service “was no longer in the interest of the country.”
Soper said he was “terminated without warning by a three- to four-sentence letter,” and when he asked why, he was told, “I don’t know.”
The judges said one of the most damaging consequences of the firings was the removal of senior judges responsible for training new hires.
The discussion also focused on Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations inside courthouses. Petit called courthouse arrests by ICE “very disruptive to the entire system” and said they create a “chilling effect” that deters people from attending hearings, sometimes triggering “dire consequences.”
Soper called the operations “disturbing” and said, “I don’t think there is any way from a moral or ethical point of view to defend what I.C.E. is doing.”
Doolittle described witnessing ICE arrest a person in his courtroom and alleged officers tased the individual “seven times.” He said it was “very disturbing” and that staff “lost sleep over it.”
Petit said judges are expected to remain impartial and cannot reassure individuals targeted by ICE. Soper agreed, saying, “We have a very specific role to play.” He said he initially believed the immigration court system was fair, but after witnessing arrests in court, reflected, “This is not the Department of Justice.”
Doolittle emphasized that even if immigration law is “harsh and unfair,” “whatever the law might be, people are entitled to a fair hearing.”
Briggs argued that federal employees are “under attack,” citing what he called the dismantling of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). Soper is currently challenging his termination through the MSPB.
According to the National Press Club, the administration is now recruiting military attorneys to serve as temporary judges under accelerated six-month appointments and abbreviated training.
Petit said the primary issue is the lack of senior judges to train them. “It takes a long time to feel experienced. Six-month rotations are not enough,” she said.
Soper echoed the concern, adding, “Being an immigration judge is very challenging, [it is] not something you can pick up in weeks or months.” He said the military attorneys were not at fault, adding, “There is no reason to question the integrity of the military judges, but they are not being set up for success.”
The panel concluded by appealing directly to the public.
Doolittle said Americans should understand that high caseloads prevent fair hearings. Petit reiterated the system requires judicial independence and said this is not a “partisan issue.” Soper said the problem is not the judges, but “the leadership.” Briggs warned that eliminating judicial independence endangers everyone. He said, “denying due process to immigrants is not compassionate at all,” and concluded “due process is at stake, not just for immigrants but for all of us.”
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
