DOJ swears in 82 immigration judges in record hiring push, explicitly calls for 'deportation' in ad

The Department of Justice swore in 82 immigration judges, the largest class in history, to address a 3.2 million backlog of immigration cases. The recruitment effort includes an additional 25% signing bonus for first-time federal employees in multiple major cities. The incoming group includes 77 full-time and five temporary judges who will decide asylum cases. Since returning to office in 2025, the Trump administration fired or pushed out more than 100 immigration judges nationwide from a corps of over 700. At least 14 of those were in San Francisco, and many judges reportedly await explanations. The Executive Office for Immigration Review states judges consider evidence and arguments from both parties and decide cases timely, impartially, and consistently with applicable law. A law professor raises concerns that the hiring process could affect asylum outcomes.

"Following an aggressive ad recruitment drive to bring in "deportation judges," the Department of Justice announced the swearing-in of 82 immigration judges, the largest class in history to tackle the 3.2 million backlog in cases. The ad that seeks to recruit "deportation judges" boasts an additional 25% signing bonus for first-time federal employees in cities such as San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, Concord, Sacramento, Santa Ana, Boston, and Chelmsford."

"The incoming group of judges includes 77 full-time and five temporary judges who will help decide asylum cases in the United States. Since returning to office in 2025, the Trump administration has fired or pushed out roughly more than 100 immigration judges nationwide out of a corps of over 700 judges at the start of his term. At least 14 of those were in San Francisco. Many judges are still waiting for an explanation."

"In a statement, the Executive Office for Immigration Review said immigration judges "consider all evidence and arguments presented by both parties and decide each case in a manner that is timely, impartial, and consistent with applicable law." Bill Hing, professor of law and migration studies at the University of San Francisco, is raising concerns about the hiring process and the potential impact on asylum decisions."

""We should expect that this is the end of asylum. When you appear before one of these 77 judges, you're going to be denied and it's a shame because this isn't about fairness. This isn't about hiring people who are supp""

Read at ABC7 San Francisco