The administration has dismissed more than 50 federal immigration judges under the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), part of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), since Trump’s second term began, with some estimates putting the figure above 100 when including voluntary resignations. Many of the terminations occurred via email without notice, and some of the judges dismissed were still within their probationary periods or had strong performance records.

The dismissals come amid a substantial backlog of immigration-court cases (reported at around 3.7 million) and the administration’s push for expedited deportations and stricter immigration enforcement. Supporters of the action frame it as a move toward greater efficiency and accountability in a notoriously slow system. They argue that removing underperforming judges and reducing administrative inertia is a necessary reform to match enforcement priorities.

Critics, however, warn that the purge of judges undermines judicial independence and could compromise due process for immigrants. Union leaders and terminated judges claim the dismissals are politically motivated—or discriminatory—and that the mass turnover leaves the courts understaffed, feeding delays and threatening fairness. They point to the absence of cause in many terminations and a culture of fear among remaining adjudicators.

In short, the large-scale dismissals of immigration judges illustrate a key tension between efficiency and fairness in the immigration-court system. While the administration argues the reforms are aligned with enforcement goals, the longer-term implications include potential impacts on docket stability, rights of noncitizens, and the integrity of immigration adjudication. The story remains unfolding and may shape how immigration courts operate for years to come.