On May 20, 2026, the Department of Justice held an investiture ceremony in its Great Hall in Washington, D.C., marking a watershed moment for the nation's immigration court system.
The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) swore in 77 immigration judges and 5 temporary immigration judges — the largest class of new adjudicators in EOIR's history, growing the total immigration judge corps to nearly 700.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and EOIR Director Daren K. Margolin delivered remarks, and Chief Immigration Judge Teresa L. Riley administered the oath of office.
The ceremony represents more than a symbolic milestone. It sits at the center of a sweeping overhaul of the U.S. immigration court system — one that has drawn praise from enforcement advocates and deep concern from immigration lawyers and civil liberties groups alike.
A Record-Breaking Hiring Year
EOIR has hired 153 permanent immigration judges this fiscal year, the most in any single year in the agency's history.
That pace of hiring is unprecedented.
For comparison, in FY2022, EOIR hired 104 immigration judges, which was its previous largest annual number of hires on record.
Most of the new immigration judges had previously worked as lawyers for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, prosecutors, or in the military.
Some of the other new judges previously worked as state or local judges or as lawyers in private practice.
All EOIR immigration judges, including temporary immigration judges, undergo the same robust training program
, according to the agency.
The Backstory: Firings, Departures, and Rebuilding
The record-setting hiring class must be understood in context.
When President Trump took office, the Justice Department had more than 700 immigration judges.
By earlier this year, that number had dipped below 600.
The Trump administration fired nearly 100 immigration judges in 2025
, according to NPR's independent tally.
Dozens more judges retired or resigned, citing discomfort surrounding new policies about how they were supposed to adjudicate.
In total, 202 judges who were working in early 2025 are no longer there.
The new appointments raise the total number of judges to close to 700, reversing a decline after more than 100 were fired since early 2025.
The administration has framed the personnel overhaul as necessary to restore integrity to the system.
DOJ officials stated those judges were removed for adjudicating based on politics rather than law and for approving far too many immigration requests.
Critics, however, see a more troubling pattern.
The judges removed share notably high asylum-grant rates, and the firings occurred without explanation, raising concerns about political interference, due process, and the erosion of judicial independence.
Tackling the Backlog
The operational rationale for the hiring surge is difficult to dispute on pure numbers alone.
Reducing the immigration court backlog remains one of the highest priorities for the agency. Since January 20, 2025, EOIR has completed more than 1.08 million cases and has reduced its pending caseload by more than 447,000 cases, bringing it from approximately 4 million to under 3.53 million — the sharpest decrease in caseload in EOIR's history.
Still, the remaining mountain of cases is enormous.
At 3.53 million pending cases, even 700 judges processing cases at an aggressive clip face years of work.
Immigration judges each heard an average of 700 cases over the past year, according to the National Association of Immigration Judges.
The number of new Notices to Appear (NTAs) filed in the immigration courts has plummeted under the current administration, from nearly 1.8 million in FY 2024 to just over 238,000 in the first half of FY 2026.
That decline in initial receipts gave judges the space to address the backlog, and on average 1.42 immigration court cases were completed for each new one filed in FY 2025.
Dramatic Shift in Asylum Outcomes
Perhaps the most consequential dimension of the court system's transformation is the sharp decline in asylum approval rates.
In a fact-sheet released on April 10, the White House declared that the United States has achieved a "historic low" asylum-approval rate of just 7%, down from roughly 50% two years earlier.
According to administration figures, immigration courts issued nearly 500,000 removal orders in fiscal 2025 — 57% more than the previous year.
More than 60% of removal orders were issued in absentia when applicants failed to appear for hearings
, a statistic that critics argue reflects fear of detention and limited access to counsel rather than abuse of the system.
What This Means for Immigrants and Applicants
For the millions of noncitizens currently navigating the U.S. immigration court system, these developments carry immediate and far-reaching implications.
Faster case processing — for better or worse.
With higher capacity, cases can move through the process faster. This could lead to quicker decisions on whether individuals should be deported or allowed to remain in the United States.
For those with strong claims, faster adjudication means an end to years of uncertainty. For those with weaker cases, it means less time to gather evidence or secure legal counsel.
The representation gap is more critical than ever.
Seventeen percent of asylum applicants lacked representation, and their outcomes were far more sobering: only 19% were granted asylum, compared to 53% for those with counsel.
In the current adjudicatory environment, appearing before a new immigration judge without an attorney poses significant risks.
Concerns about judicial independence persist.
While proponents say the expansion is necessary to restore efficiency, critics caution that prioritizing speed over due process risks compromising the equity of an already strained legal system.
Judges represented by the union are worried that the newly sworn-in judges may be driven to adhere to the Trump administration's agenda and policies.
New judges face a learning curve.
There is a learning curve new immigration judges experience after onboarding
, a reality acknowledged even by commentators who support the hiring push.
New judges require time to learn on the job, which impacts case completion rates.
Looking Ahead
The Big Beautiful Bill caps the number of immigration judges at 800
, setting an eventual ceiling on the bench.
That cap takes effect on November 1, 2028. Prior to that time, there are no restrictions on judge numbers
, which means the administration has a window to hire aggressively.
While immigration judges operate under the EOIR rather than the independent federal judiciary, they are legally bound to serve as neutral arbiters in cases brought by government attorneys against noncitizens.
Whether the newly reshaped bench will uphold that mandate with the rigor the moment demands will be tested case by case, court by court, in the months and years ahead.
For individuals in removal proceedings, the practical takeaway is clear: thorough preparation, strong documentation, and skilled legal representation have never been more essential. If you or someone you know is facing immigration court proceedings, consulting with an experienced immigration attorney should be a top priority.