CHICAGO — Immigration attorney Omar Abuzir faced a challenge in court as he explained to his client the complexities and failures within the immigration system.
Despite presenting a solid case backed by extensive documentation, he noted a troubling trend.
“The prosecutors are not agreeing to anything,” he remarked, emphasizing the significant shift in the court’s atmosphere.
This situation is reflective of the broader changes instituted since President Donald Trump’s administration took office in January.
Trump’s commitment to stringent immigration policies has transformed the landscape of the nation’s 70 immigration courts, resulting in drastic consequences for countless immigrants.
“There has just been an onslaught of change from day one of this administration,” stated Shannon Shepherd, an experienced immigration lawyer in Chicago.
She highlighted the harshness of the government’s recent court actions, which seem increasingly severe and unyielding.
The administration’s strategy includes rapidly processing cases while adhering to a more aggressive enforcement policy against the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants residing in the U.S.
Key changes initiated include:
– The elimination of free legal counsel for approximately 26,000 unaccompanied minors.
– Authorizing immigration court judges to determine asylum eligibility without a formal hearing.
– The closure of three ombudsman offices that monitored court proceedings, detention centers, and the treatment of immigrants by law enforcement.
These sweeping alterations have contributed to an overwhelming backlog of cases, reaching a staggering 3.4 million nationally as of June, which is more than double the backlog from all of 2021.
Specifically, the Immigration Court in Chicago faced a backlog of over 222,000 cases, a fivefold increase from 2020.
Outside these courtrooms, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests soared by 124% nationally, with a notable 98% increase in Illinois alone, according to a New York Times analysis.
In June, the number of immigrants held in detention centers hit a record high, with 57,861 individuals detained across the U.S., surpassing the highest figures observed since 2019.
Although there are only 41,500 detention beds available, the government’s enforcement directives have triggered a wave of litigation from immigrant and human rights organizations.
The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which oversees immigration courts, has not commented on these staffing changes or policy alterations.
With an ambitious goal set by the Trump administration to arrest 3,000 immigrants daily, the expedited removal process was expanded, allowing for quicker deportations of individuals who had arrived in the country within the last two years.
Immigrants could now face removal without a court hearing unless they explicitly express fears regarding their deportation, a fact that often goes unknown to them, according to legal advocates.
Neither the courts nor the surrounding community have remained untouched by these developments.
The EOIR lifted restrictions on enforcement actions in areas surrounding immigration courts, allowing ICE agents to make arrests immediately following case dismissals.
Instances have been documented where immigration lawyers witnessed ICE detaining their clients immediately after winning their cases.
A long-time immigration lawyer, who requested anonymity, recounted a shocking experience wherein their client was led away just moments after the court determined the case was closed.
“I don’t want to make trouble. This court has ways of getting back at you,” the lawyer stated, reflecting the tension and fear pervasive within the court system.
The EOIR has further implemented a strategy to reshape the judiciary by introducing new rules and drastically altering the workforce at immigration courts.
In January, EOIR dismissed its top officials and subsequently eliminated dozens of immigration judges, including several who were undergoing training.
Legal experts and former judges criticized these firings, deeming them unnecessary, particularly as the court backlog continues to grow.
Matt Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), noted that it is contradictory to cut staff during a period of increasing demands.
“It’s outrageous and against the public interest to remove judges when Congress has authorized 800 immigration judges,” he stated.
Additionally, senators Elizabeth Warren and Edward Markey from Massachusetts, expressed their concern over the potential politicization of the courts in a letter to the EOIR.
They pointed out that judges who were not dismissed had backgrounds in immigration enforcement, raising questions about impartiality in the system.
One anonymous judge shared their dedication to working fairly, particularly for immigrants lacking legal representation.
However, the increasing severity of the backdrop in the immigration courts prompted doubts about the safety of their position in an atmosphere shaped by fear and pressure.
“There is a concern that if you don’t make decisions in line with the administration’s expectations, your job could be at risk,” the judge reflected.
In public remarks, Chad Mizelle, chief of staff at the Department of Justice, suggested that immigration judges had wielded too much power in the past and emphasized a need to realign immigration enforcement with presidential oversight.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) condemned the slew of changes, arguing they would compromise the neutrality vital to judicial proceedings.
AILA indicated that a recent EOIR email instructed judges on how to manage their workloads, including mandates for judges to deliver oral decisions immediately following hearings, a directive controversially argued to infringe on established judicial regulations.
The New York City Bar recently voiced its dissent against the Trump administration’s aggressive alterations to the immigration system, encouraging attorneys to do their part in safeguarding individual rights.
As it stands in the wake of these shifts, immigration courts have become increasingly inhospitable environments for immigrants seeking justice.
Data revealed that the asylum denial rate jumped to 79% nationally by April, marking a stark rise from 51% in the preceding year, the highest in over two decades.
In Chicago’s Immigration Court, judges granted asylum in just over 50% of the cases as of May.
The environment’s modifications have cultivated widespread apprehension and uncertainty among the immigrant community.
As soon as the Trump administration announced enhanced measures for immigration enforcement, fear became rampant.
Attorney Shannon Shepherd remarked on the environment of panic that took hold in the community.
Traditional support structures dissolved, with even those legally present expressing anxiety about potential detention.
“I’ve never seen that before,” she noted.
Likewise, attorney Martin Perez observed an atmosphere of dread permeating the immigrant population.
“Everyone seems to be afraid of being detained, and there’s good reason for them to fear that,” he asserted.
Cases that, in the past, would result in release now find immigrants entangled in detention, including cases like that of one client of Perez’s who has lived in the U.S. for 30 years and has four children.
“In years past, someone like that would have been released,” Perez commented.
The administration’s focus on ejecting immigrants with criminal records obscures the reality that the majority in detention lack any convictions.
Recent findings indicated that about 71% of those held in ICE detention centers had no prior criminal history.
The financial burden of legal representation for immigrants compounded the struggle for a significant number.
With a scarcity of available resources, requests for free legal services often exceed offerings, leading to greater uncertainty regarding trustworthy assistance.
Statistics show that merely one in four immigrants in Chicago’s immigration court in 2025 had legal representation, as opposed to just over one in three nationwide.
Claire Doutre, who previously worked in immigration court in Houston before relocating to Chicago, vividly recounted the changes she has witnessed.
“Prosecutors rarely bargain. Many more clients are detained,” she noted, emphasizing the shift in the judicial dynamic.
Immigrants are increasingly moved between prisons, often as far from Illinois as Texas or Louisiana, where they confront harsher judges.
This geographical displacement disrupts family connections and complicates legal representation, leaving attorneys to rely on phone or video communications that heighten concerns regarding client confidentiality.
Doutre lamented, “On top of not providing attorneys, the system is not friendly at all.
When you enter the court, not everyone will speak your language.
You are supposed to know everything.”
In Chicago’s immigration court, a young woman named Tania exemplified the struggles many face.
Sitting in the waiting area for hours, she eventually found herself in front of a judge who informed her that her removal from the U.S. had been ordered without her understanding the proceedings.
Left to navigate the complexities of submitting forms for a new trial, Tania clutched the pages, bewildered and uncertain about her future.
The sense of being lost in a complex system defined her experience, one echoed throughout the many immigrants who traverse the courts in search of justice and hope.
image source from：blockclubchicago
