DOJ Gives Judges Green Light to Dump Asylum Cases
Judges can now toss claims sans hearings to cut 4M-case backlog.
WASHINGTON — A new U.S. Department of Justice policy is allowing immigration judges to dismiss asylum applications deemed legally insufficient without holding a hearing, prompting concerns about due process amid efforts to tackle a massive immigration court backlog. The guidance, issued by the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), has drawn mixed reactions from legal advocates and immigration officials.
The policy, outlined in a memorandum by EOIR Acting Director Sirce Owen on April 11, 2025, clarifies that immigration judges may dismiss asylum claims lacking viable legal grounds without a hearing if no factual disputes exist. “Immigration judges are not prohibited from taking action to resolve cases that lack viable legal grounds for relief or protection from removal,” Owen stated in the memo, emphasizing the need to address nearly 4 million pending immigration cases.
MIGRANT INSIDER IS SPONSORED BY
The backlog, which has grown significantly in recent years, has strained the immigration court system, with cases often taking years to resolve. Supporters of the policy argue it streamlines the process for claims unlikely to succeed. “This is a necessary step to reduce inefficiencies in the overwhelmed immigration system,” an EOIR spokesperson said, echoing sentiments from the memo’s defenders.
However, legal advocates have raised alarms about the potential impact on asylum seekers, particularly those without legal representation. Vanessa Dojaquez-Torres, Practice and Policy Counsel at the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), expressed concern that the policy could disproportionately harm pro se applicants. “This policy risks undermining due process, especially for individuals who lack the resources to navigate complex immigration law,” Dojaquez-Torres said.
The policy comes amid broader tensions within the EOIR, including a lawsuit filed by the National Association of Immigration Judges against the DOJ. The suit, filed in March 2025, alleges that the mass firing of over 40 immigration judges and staff since January has exacerbated the backlog and disrupted court operations. “The firings of immigration judges when we need more judges to enforce our immigration laws by this administration is a perfect example of hypocrisy,” said Matthew Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers, in a statement to the Associated Press.
Critics argue the dismissals without hearings could lead to hasty decisions, potentially overlooking valid claims. “The risk here is that legally insufficient doesn’t always mean meritless,” said Karen Tumlin, founder of Justice Action Center, in an interview with Law360. “This could close the door on people who deserve protection.”
The DOJ maintains that the policy aligns with existing regulations and aims to reserve hearings for cases with substantive disputes. Owen’s memo noted that “hearings should be reserved for claims where factual disputes are present,” citing the backlog as a significant challenge to timely case resolution.
As the policy takes effect, its implementation will likely face scrutiny from advocacy groups and legal challenges, with questions lingering about balancing efficiency and fairness in the immigration system. The EOIR has not announced plans to hire additional judges to address the backlog, leaving the courts under pressure as new cases continue to mount.