Press "Enter" to skip to content

Fired Immigration Judge’s Asylum Rulings Clash with Trump Policy

Immigration Judge Dismissed After Granting Asylum Cases at Unusual Rate

In a surprising development, a U.S. Army Reserve lawyer assigned as a federal immigration judge has been dismissed after a mere month in the role. Christopher Day, who began hearing cases in October at the immigration court in Annandale, Virginia, was removed from his position around December 2, according to the National Association of Immigration Judges.

The reasons behind Day’s dismissal remain undisclosed. While Day refrained from commenting to The Associated Press, and the Justice Department similarly declined to address personnel issues, data suggests a potential cause. According to November figures, Day’s rulings on asylum cases deviated significantly from the Trump administration’s deportation-oriented objectives.

In November, Day concluded 11 cases, granting asylum or other forms of relief in six instances, as per data scrutinized by Mobile Pathways, a nonprofit based in San Francisco. This pattern of decision-making stands in stark contrast to the administration’s efforts to reduce the nation’s 3.8 million asylum case backlog by overhauling the immigration courts.

The Trump administration has previously removed nearly 100 judges perceived as overly lenient, and has relaxed the criteria, allowing attorneys of varied backgrounds to apply for roles as “Deportation Judges.” In line with these changes, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authorized up to 600 military lawyers to adjudicate asylum cases, a move aimed at aligning judicial functions more closely with the administration’s deportation agenda.

However, the appointment of military officers with limited immigration law expertise has been criticized by the American Immigration Lawyers Association, likening it to having specialists outside their field perform critical procedures. Pentagon and White House officials, on the other hand, argue that addressing the asylum backlog is a collective responsibility benefiting all parties involved.

Out of the 30 military members detailed to immigration courts so far, most have met the administration’s expectations. In November, nine out of ten migrants judged by these military officers were either deported or chose to self-deport. Overall, military judges have ordered removals in 78% of cases, compared to 63% by other judges.

Judges like Day, whose rulings diverge from the norm, may face vulnerability if deemed to have breached military obligations, according to Dana Leigh Marks, a retired immigration judge. “It is hard to imagine someone being fired so quickly, after five weeks on the bench, unless it was for ideological reasons,” Marks noted.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice prohibits interference or retaliation against military attorneys within military tribunals, but its application outside such settings remains uncertain.

Villanova University law professor Brenner Fissell highlights the challenges faced by military personnel in appealing adverse personnel actions, which can be a lengthy and expensive process. “The process can be the punishment,” Fissell stated, emphasizing the difficulties involved in seeking redress.

Day, a graduate of American University law school, has held various federal government positions over two decades while serving as a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve’s Judge Advocate General’s Corps. His previous role was as an attorney for the Federal Communications Commission during the Biden administration.

Unlike federal judges, immigration judges are employees of the Justice Department and can be dismissed with fewer protections. This was underscored during a training course for new judges, where the precarious nature of their roles was made clear, according to a participant who wished to remain anonymous.

The Pentagon has offered incentives to military officers volunteering for temporary assignments in immigration courts, promising choice of assignments to those who step forward. However, officers may face mandatory relocation for up to six months if sufficient volunteers do not come forward, as indicated in a JAG Corps email shared with the AP.