Massive Judge PURGE — 3 Million Trapped in Limbo

The Trump administration’s strategic restructuring of immigration courts has slashed the judicial workforce by 25% while facing down a staggering 3.38 million case backlog, forcing millions of immigrants into legal limbo as the DOJ pivots toward enforcement-focused adjudication.

Story Snapshot

Immigration judge numbers plummeted from 726 in February 2025 to 520 by February 2026 following nearly 100 firings and dozens of resignations amid policy realignment.
The court backlog surged to 3.38 million cases with average wait times approaching 900 days, doubling the 2017 figures.
Twelve immigration courts lost over 50% of their judges, while Aurora, Colorado and Oakdale, Louisiana dropped to zero judges entirely.
DOJ launched controversial “deportation judge” hiring in November 2025, recruiting 17 permanent judges from ICE and DHS backgrounds plus 52 temporary military JAG officers.

Administrative Purge Reshapes Court System

The Trump administration executed a comprehensive overhaul of immigration courts starting February 2025, terminating approximately 100 judges while dozens more resigned under policy pressure. The Executive Office for Immigration Review, operating under DOJ authority, saw its judicial roster collapse from 726 permanent judges to 520 within twelve months. San Francisco’s court suffered the steepest losses, shedding 16 judges—the highest nationwide. This represents a stark reversal from 2014-2024, when EOIR tripled its judicial workforce across 75 courts to address growing caseloads, demonstrating how enforcement priorities now supersede expansion efforts.

Backlog Crisis Compounds Due Process Concerns

The case backlog exploded to 3.38 million by early 2026, with TRAC Immigration data revealing Florida alone carries 528,000 pending cases while Texas shoulders 388,000 and California 366,000. Average wait times hit 900 days, raising serious due process violations under 5 U.S.C. §555(b) requirements for timely adjudication. Asylum cases, comprising 40% of the docket, drive complexity as judges face doubled caseloads. Hartford, Connecticut exemplifies the crisis: five remaining judges now manage 40,000 cases. Former immigration judge Doolittle described workloads as “overwhelming,” crushing resources while EOIR claims productivity remains unaffected—a position contradicting frontline realities.

Enforcement-Focused Recruitment Draws Scrutiny

DOJ’s November 2025 hiring campaign for “deportation judges” recruited 17 permanent appointments primarily from ICE and DHS enforcement backgrounds, supplemented by 52 temporary military JAG officers. Recruitment advertisements urged candidates to “deliver justice to criminal illegal aliens,” signaling a shift from impartial adjudication toward enforcement alignment. This approach concerns due process advocates, as judges traditionally required independence from agencies whose decisions they review. The administration fired JAG Judge Day for granting high asylum rates, illustrating outcome-based pressure. Supervisors like Khan defended terminated judges’ performance records, revealing tensions between legal standards and political expectations under the new deportation-priority framework.

Systematic Impact on Immigrant Communities

Over three million immigrants remain trapped in legal uncertainty, with families in North Carolina, Florida, Texas, and New York facing years-long waits that strain local economies and community stability. Attorney Vasquez noted clients endure “years of uncertainty for families,” unable to work legally or reunite with relatives. Courts in Aurora and Oakdale ceased functioning entirely without judges, halting all proceedings. Newark’s court alone carries 90,000 pending cases. The stagnant EOIR budget—rising just 4% between 2024-2026—cannot match demand, while Congressional reform proposals languish. The Congressional Budget Office projects an additional 210,000 cases between 2026-2029, ensuring the crisis extends well beyond 2027 without legislative intervention or substantial resource allocation changes.

Constitutional and Operational Risks Mount

The skeleton-crew court system risks constitutional challenges as prolonged delays potentially violate administrative procedure law guarantees for timely hearings. Twelve courts lost over half their judges, five operate with single judges, and two have none—conditions incompatible with fair adjudication. Support staff losses exceeded 400 positions, compounding judicial workload. EOIR’s pilot digital tools and remote hearings offer limited relief without addressing core staffing deficits. The politicization of courts through enforcement-focused hiring threatens judicial independence, a cornerstone principle that separates legitimate legal proceedings from administrative rubber-stamping. As morale collapses and error risks climb, the system faces its gravest operational crisis since immigration courts’ modern establishment.