Immigration Attorneys Say Courts Hold 100+ Case Hearings Daily
Immigration attorneys say some courts are holding – Legal professionals in the immigration field are reporting that certain courts are now processing over 100 case hearings each day, a dramatic increase from previous norms. Joseph M. Perez, an experienced immigration law attorney, shared his observations about a recent session in Annandale, Virginia, where the judge scheduled 100 cases in a single day. “These master calendar sessions are meant to handle a high volume of cases efficiently,” Perez explained to ABC News. Typically, such sessions involve 10 to 15 individuals, but the recent surge has led to massive gatherings, raising concerns about how well the system can maintain fairness under such pressure.
Massive Hearings Raise Efficiency and Fairness Concerns
Immigration attorneys are now referring to these intense proceedings as “mega masters,” a term that reflects the scale and frequency of the new schedule. The shift has forced legal teams to adjust their strategies, often with little advance notice. Briana Carlson, a Virginia-based attorney, described the sudden rescheduling of her client’s hearing from July to the present. “We were preparing an application for relief when we checked the online calendar and saw the new date,” she said. “There was no communication beforehand, and the court was following a directive to prioritize July-scheduled cases.”
“The administration aims to accelerate deportations by clearing the backlog swiftly,” said Vanessa Dojaquez-Torres, a Practice and Policy Counsel at the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA). “This approach targets individuals who might not attend their hearings, leading to automatic removal orders.”
Dojaquez-Torres emphasized that the strategy has impacted those without legal representation. “Without proper preparation, vulnerable populations are at higher risk of being deported without due process,” she added. Legal associations have advised attorneys to monitor online schedules closely, as cases are frequently moved without prior warning. This has created a need for constant vigilance, with some practitioners now adjusting their workflows to keep up with the rapid pace of these hearings.
EOIR Directive to Streamline Deportation Processes
A spokesperson for the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) confirmed that a directive has been issued to speed up master calendar hearings. “The goal is to ensure timely case resolution and expedite removals for individuals with valid claims,” the statement read. The agency has also expanded its workforce by adding more immigration judges to handle the increased workload. However, this initiative has sparked debates about whether the fast-track process compromises the rights of those appearing in court.
Immigration attorneys say some courts are holding 100+ case hearings daily, often in a single session without sufficient time for thorough examination. One Virginia judge announced 80 cases on a recent day, a significant jump from the average of 15. “This is a change in how we approach these hearings,” said Perez. “The system is now moving at a pace that could leave legal arguments underdeveloped.” The directive has also led to a rise in in absentia removals, as some individuals fail to attend their scheduled appointments due to the overwhelming schedule.
Backlog and Legal Challenges in Deportation Proceedings
The increased volume of hearings has intensified the strain on the immigration system, which already faces a substantial backlog. Critics argue that the Trump administration’s emphasis on rapid deportations has shifted focus away from individualized evaluations. “These mega sessions are a way to process a large number of cases quickly, but they can also lead to errors in judgment,” noted Perez. Immigration attorneys say some courts are holding 100+ case hearings daily, often without the usual procedural safeguards that ensure a fair review of each individual’s circumstances.
In absentia removal orders have become more common, with many cases decided without the defendant present. This practice has drawn criticism from legal advocates, who stress that it can result in deportations based on incomplete information. “Without the chance to present a case, people might lose their opportunity to fight for their stay,” said Carlson. As the system continues to operate at this accelerated pace, the challenge remains to balance efficiency with the right to a fair legal process.
