Could Immigration Judges Be Fired for Their Decisions? A Court Case That Could Change the System
By Khlood Awan, Intern
Should immigration judges be able to lose their jobs simply because a new president disagrees with how they decide cases?
That question is at the center of an important court case, Jackler v. Department of Justice, which could have a lasting impact on the U.S. immigration system-and on the independence of many other federal employees.
The case was brought by two immigration judges who were fired in early 2025. They argue that the Department of Justice violated the law by firing them without following the procedures that normally protect career federal employees. Those protections are designed to make sure government workers cannot be removed unfairly or for political reasons.
The case has become so important that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided that all of its active judges-not just the usual three-judge panel-will hear it. This type of hearing is rare and is usually reserved for cases that could have broad effects across the country.
The case comes just months after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Slaughter, which gave the President greater power to remove the leaders of independent federal agencies. The new case asks a different question: Does that presidential power also extend to immigration judges and other career government employees whose job is to decide individual cases fairly and independently?
The answer could affect far more than immigration judges.
If the government wins, it could become easier to fire immigration judges and other career officials. Some people worry that judges might feel pressure to make decisions that match the priorities of the current administration instead of simply following the law. Because presidential administrations change every four years, immigration decisions could become less consistent over time.
For immigrants and asylum seekers, that could create uncertainty about whether their cases will be decided based only on the facts and the law. More broadly, it could affect public confidence that government decision-makers are free to act independently, without worrying about political consequences.
On the other hand, if the judges win, the court would reinforce the idea that career government employees who decide cases should be protected from political firing. Supporters of that position say those protections help ensure that cases are decided fairly, regardless of which political party is in power.
The case has drawn growing attention beyond the two judges involved. In late July and early August 2026, members of Congress and several former directors of the Office of Personnel Management filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting the judges. They warned that if the government can treat immigration judges as employees with no meaningful job protections, the same reasoning could eventually apply to thousands of other career federal workers who are expected to make independent decisions.
The full Federal Circuit is expected to hear oral arguments later this fall. Whatever the court decides could shape not only the future of immigration courts, but also the balance between presidential power and the independence of the federal workforce for years to come.
www.grossmanyoung.com | info@grossmanyoung.com | (240) 403-0913 | (301) 917-6900
*Disclaimer: This information is presented for the purposes of general education and does not constitute legal advice.
