Congress Must Act To Assure The Rule Of Law In Immigration Courts

A Court System Controlled By The Prosecutor The fundamental unfairness of the U.S. immigration court system is that it places adjudication inside the same political department that prosecutes immigration cases, making the system inherently vulnerable to political interference. Immigration courts are housed within the Department of Justice (DOJ), and immigration judges are DOJ employees, hired, evaluated, and removable by the nation’s chief prosecutor. A structure that allows the prosecutor to control the court cannot deliver reliable neutrality or meaningful due process. Structural Conflict And Susceptibility To Political Influence The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), including immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), operates entirely under authority delegated by the Attorney General. Immigration judges therefore function as subordinates within a political law enforcement agency rather than as independent judicial officers. This arrangement does not merely risk bias; it invites political influence by design, particularly when immigration enforcement becomes a partisan priority. Prosecutorial Control Of Caselaw And Appeals By regulation, the Attorney General may review and reverse BIA decisions and may issue decisions that bind immigration judges nationwide as controlling precedent. The Attorney General may also designate selected BIA decisions as binding precedent. As a result, the same political official whose department is litigating removal cases can shape the governing law and influence outcomes across the country. Judge Removals That Undermine Independence Recent reporting indicates that more than 100 immigration judges, out of roughly 700 nationwide, have been fired or forced out since January 2025, with many additional judges resigning under pressure. This scale of turnover is not routine attrition; it is a destabilizing purge that sends a clear warning to remaining judges that their careers depend on pleasing the same political authority appearing before them in court. In a striking recent example, a U.S. Army Reserve lawyer detailed as a federal immigration judge was dismissed barely a month into his assignment after granting asylum at a rate that diverged from mass deportation priorities — highlighting how rapidly judges can be removed for decisions at odds with political goals.  In such an environment, neutrality is no longer protected by law alone but chilled by fear, and the promise of independent judgment becomes illusory even without a single explicit directive. Congressional Action Is Urgently Required I urge you to speak out publicly, hold oversight hearings, and introduce or support legislation to remove immigration adjudication from DOJ control. Immigration courts should be reconstituted as an independent court system, ideally within the Article III judiciary, or at minimum with protections equivalent to Article III independence. If we care about due process, we must remove immigration courts from political control.