Chicago sees exodus of immigration judges during Trump’s second term

President Donald Trump’s second term has brought significant changes to the immigration court system, with Chicago experiencing a substantial departure of immigration judges as the administration implements its hardline enforcement agenda.

Heading into his second term, President Trump promised to immediately target the immigration system with sweeping enforcement pushes and a hardline approach to granting asylum in the United States. He has pursued that pledge with headline-grabbing efforts like Operation Midway Blitz, but also through structural changes to the immigration court system.

Chicago’s immigration court has lost nearly half the judges who worked there, according to reports emerging as the administration’s policies take hold.

The departure of judges from the Chicago immigration court represents one concrete result of the administration’s broader strategy to reshape how immigration cases are processed and adjudicated. The court had been operating with a full complement of judges prior to the policy shifts implemented under President Trump’s second term agenda.

President Trump’s approach to immigration has combined high-profile enforcement operations with more systemic changes to the bureaucracy that handles immigration proceedings. Operation Midway Blitz exemplifies the visible enforcement side of the strategy, while the changes affecting immigration courts represent the structural component.

The administration has taken a hardline approach to granting asylum, signaling a shift in how claims are evaluated and processed.

Immigration courts operate under the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which falls under the Department of Justice. Judges in these courts hear cases involving deportation proceedings, asylum claims, and other immigration matters. The departure of experienced judges can affect case backlogs and the pace at which hearings proceed.

The Chicago court serves a significant portion of the Midwest region’s immigration cases. The reduction in judicial staff comes at a time when immigration enforcement has been elevated as a top priority for the administration.

The exodus of judges reflects the broader tensions between the administration’s enforcement priorities and the independent adjudicatory role immigration judges play in the system.

President Trump campaigned on promises to overhaul the immigration system, and the changes in Chicago’s immigration court demonstrate how those pledges are translating into operational shifts within the federal bureaucracy. The combination of enforcement operations and structural changes represents a multi-pronged approach to immigration policy.

The impact of reduced judicial staffing in Chicago remains to be fully measured as the administration continues implementing its immigration agenda. Cases that would have been heard by departed judges will need to be reassigned or delayed, potentially affecting immigrants awaiting hearings on their status in the United States.