The Trump administration is cramming as many as 200 immigration cases into single court sessions, a move that has cut the backlog for the first time in a decade but drawn sharp criticism from attorneys who say immigrants are being ordered deported without a fair chance to appear.
Immigration courts from Chicago to Omaha to northern Virginia have seen a dramatic shift since May. Judges now preside over what officials and attorneys call "mega master" hearings, where 50, 100, or even close to 200 people cycle through a single proceeding in a day. The hearings replace the older format, which typically handled 20 to 30 cases at a time. Judges address the room with group questions, "How many of you have a lawyer?" and "Are you claiming asylum?", before moving through dockets at a pace one observer described as "rapid fire."
The scale is staggering. USA TODAY reported that more than 1,300 mass hearings took place in June alone, nearly triple the number from the same month a year earlier, based on Department of Justice data analyzed by the nonprofit Mobile Pathways. Of the 10,370 people assigned to those June hearings, 58 percent were ruled absent. When an immigrant doesn't show, the judge can issue a deportation order on the spot.
The Department of Justice made no apologies for the push. "Reducing the immigration court backlog remains one of the highest priorities for this administration," the department said in a statement. "The Justice Department is restoring integrity to our immigration system by hearing cases fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly, in accordance with the law."
The numbers explain why the administration sees urgency. Under the Biden administration, the immigration court backlog more than doubled from its 2021 level, peaking at 3.9 million cases. By June 2025, it still sat at 3.7 million. As of June 2026, the backlog has dropped to just over 3.4 million, still enormous, but the first sustained decline in more than ten years.
Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, credited the administration's approach. "They've made great progress at driving down the backlog," Arthur said. He noted that the number of pending cases fell in fiscal year 2025 for the first time in over a decade. Matt O'Brien, a former immigration judge now serving as deputy executive director at the Federation for American Immigration Reform, was more direct: "This is a very effective way to reduce the backlog."
The backlog didn't build itself. Arthur largely attributed the high rate of absentia orders, cases where immigrants fail to appear, to the Biden administration's failure to properly screen illegal immigrants at the border. Millions entered the system with court dates set months or years out. Many never showed. The current administration inherited that mess and is now processing it at speed.
The administration has also pursued other enforcement tools. Courts have recently handed the administration sweeping wins on immigration enforcement, reinforcing the legal authority behind broader deportation efforts.
Immigration lawyers tell a different story about what happens inside these packed courtrooms. Kiki Moseley, chair of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, spoke at a July news conference in Chicago and called the proceedings unprecedented.
"We have witnessed immigrants being ordered removed for missing their court dates, not because they did not come to court, but because they arrived on time and amid the overcrowding and confusion, could not find the correct courtroom or hear their case being called."
In Chicago, immigration lawyers described hearings with nearly 200 people before a single judge. Respondents crowded hallways and courtrooms. Joseph Perez, an immigration attorney in Virginia, said the sessions grind on for hours. "These larger hearings go on all day. It's unreasonable," he told USA TODAY.
The confusion Moseley described raises a practical question: if an immigrant arrives at the courthouse on time but can't locate the right room in a building overflowing with cases, is the resulting deportation order a product of the law or of logistics? The administration's answer, through the Executive Office for Immigration Review, is that the system "prioritizes the timely completion of all cases and makes scheduling adjustments as needed to ensure cases do not languish."
EOIR added that "unnecessary delay hurts both aliens with meritorious claims and the American public who wish to see aliens with non-meritorious claims removed as quickly as possible." The office said it would continue making scheduling adjustments as it adds new judges.
Not everyone on the bench is comfortable with the pace. Elizabeth Treacy, a former immigration judge in Chicago, resigned on June 22 after presiding over three large master hearings, each listing between 130 and 150 people. She told AP News and WBEZ Chicago that the volume created real risk.
"Whenever you have a high volume of anything in any field, it leaves a possibility for error because of fatigue [and] because of the repetitive nature of what you're reviewing. I never wanted to make a mistake in those kinds of circumstances."
Arthur acknowledged the burnout concern. "There is a danger there," he said. But he also argued that the system has safeguards. "There's a lot of due process built into the system," Arthur said, pointing to existing procedural protections that remain in place even during high-volume hearings.
The administration has meanwhile conducted a record hiring spree of immigration judges. Unlike federal judges confirmed by the Senate, immigration judges are part of the executive branch and appointed by the U.S. attorney general. That distinction matters: it means the administration can staff up quickly without congressional approval. The Des Moines Register found that all immigration judges working cases in Omaha had served as legal counsel for ICE within the last decade, with some in that role just months before their appointments.
EOIR said it evaluates all judges on conduct, impartiality, adherence to the law, productivity, and professionalism, and that all judges have a legal and ethical obligation to remain neutral. Separately, a federal judge in New York blocked most ICE arrests at Manhattan immigration courts earlier this year after the government made a procedural error, a sign that courts are watching enforcement tactics closely.
The downstream effects are measurable. Deportation orders nearly tripled from roughly 33,000 in January 2025 to about 79,000 by June 2025, Breitbart reported, citing Mobile Pathways data. Court notice times, the window between when an immigrant receives a hearing notice and the hearing itself, have been cut from about six months to often just over one month. That compressed timeline helped push the no-show rate from a historical average of roughly 20 percent to 40 percent by June 2025.
Muzaffar Chishti, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, said the hearings will accelerate removals. "This will push many more people into deportation proceedings," Chishti said. The question is whether speed and scale come at the cost of accuracy, and whether people with legitimate claims get lost in the shuffle.
The administration has also made it easier for immigration authorities to deny asylum claims and has employed courthouse arrest tactics, though a court order blocked that approach. The DOJ's activation of a long-dormant alien terrorist removal court signals the administration is willing to reach deep into the legal toolbox to enforce immigration law.
Chase McLaren, a University of Iowa law student who attended what is believed to be the first mega master hearing in Omaha, described a judge issuing orders in a "rapid fire" manner. For supporters of enforcement, that speed is a feature, not a flaw. For the immigrants in those courtrooms, many of whom entered the country illegally during the Biden years and are now facing the consequences, the pace may determine whether they get a hearing or a deportation order.
Several open questions remain. The precise legal directive authorizing the expansion of mega master hearings has not been publicly identified. It is unclear what percentage of absentia removal orders have been successfully reopened by respondents. And while federal courts have placed limits on ICE detention in other contexts, no court has yet ruled on whether the mega hearing format itself violates procedural protections.
The Biden administration let the immigration court backlog nearly double on its watch. The Trump administration is clearing it, fast, loud, and at scale. Whether every case in that avalanche gets the individual attention the law demands is a fair question. But the backlog itself was never fair to anyone: not to taxpayers funding a broken system, not to legal immigrants waiting in line, and not to the communities left absorbing the consequences of years of inaction.
