Recent actions by the Trump Administration to replace qualified immigration judges with temporarily designated military attorneys raise serious concerns about judicial independence and due process for individuals navigating the immigration system.
On August 28, DOJ’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, which administers the nation’s immigration courts, eliminated virtually all qualification requirements for temporary immigration judge positions, and the Department of Defense announced that same week it would provide 600 military attorneys, without any prior immigration law experience or required minimum years of experience, to serve six-month terms as temporary judges.
Previously, temporary judge positions were restricted to highly qualified individuals who would be able to readily adapt to the high demands of the position: former appellate and trial-level immigration judges, administrative law judges from other federal agencies, or attorneys with at least 10 years of immigration law experience.
“Where the position once required seasoned attorneys with deep immigration expertise, it can now be filled by any licensed attorney in any field, regardless of courtroom or subject-matter experience,” said Ashley Tabaddor, former immigration judge and president emeritus of the National Association of Immigration Judges.
The push to fill the immigration courts with temporary judges comes from a crisis of the administration’s own making: At a time when those courts are experiencing an overwhelming backlog of cases, the administration has terminated dozens of the judges who preside over them. Those fired seem to have been targeted because of apparent politically motivated bases, rather than any actual legitimate performance issues. This has created a culture of fear that eviscerates judicial independence.
“Firing expert, high-performing, effective judges and replacing them with inexperienced temps does not make the courts more efficient or achieve any goals of systemic reform. It is simply destructive,” said Kyra Lilien, a former immigration judge who was terminated without stated cause in July 2025.
Why Lowering the Standards for Immigration Judges Matters
Immigration judges handle cases of extraordinary consequence involving asylum seekers and long-time legal residents, and requiring complex legal determinations that can permanently separate families or determine life-or-death outcomes.
These positions require deep knowledge of immigration law, which is widely recognized as one of the most complex areas of federal law, and also intersects with state criminal and family law. Immigration judges must also possess a mastery of sophisticated judicial skills including courtroom management, credibility assessment, and the ability to issue oral decisions that will withstand appellate review. They handle dockets of up to 7,000 cases and are expected to render oral decisions immediately at the end of hours-long merits hearings.
The technical demands alone are substantial. Immigration judges must simultaneously operate complex courtroom technology, manage digital audio recording systems, and navigate dual case management platforms, all while conducting bench trials and performing complex legal analysis in real time. The vast majority of cases they hear use foreign language interpreters, and respondents are often unrepresented by legal counsel. Immigration judges also lack the support of sufficient judicial law clerks to research intricate legal issues and draft lengthy or complex decisions.
The Experience Paradox
The vast majority of judges come to the job with significant immigration experience.
“The complexity of immigration law cannot be overstated – rapid changes in legal interpretations and enforcement priorities challenge even our most experienced judges,” said Ryan Wood, founding partner of Emeriti Law and former supervisory immigration judge. “The existing process trains experienced litigators to become effective immigration judges, but only through rigorous vetting: six weeks of initial training, a full year of mentorship, two-year review processes, and ongoing education. Of course, even with this yearslong assistance, some candidates don’t succeed. The suggestion that military attorneys on six-month terms can be effective immigration judges isn’t fair to anyone involved.”
Even individuals with significant experience in immigration law, case adjudication, or courtroom management require a significant period of time to adjust to the immigration bench through proper training and sustained mentoring by experienced judges. Under the new regulations, temporary appointees selected by the Department of Defense will lack adequate background or time for full training before they receive enormous dockets.
Broader Implications
The administration’s recent actions are putting speed and convenience ahead of meritocracy and fairness. They strip people of their basic constitutional rights and go against the purpose of the laws Congress passed to protect refugees and other immigrants.
