New directives from the nation’s immigration bench are pressing judges to move cases along faster, sharply curtailing the practice of granting delays that have long given noncitizens breathing room to secure legal help or await approval of paperwork that would let them stay in the country. The policy shift, detailed in a mandatory online session held for immigration judges nationwide within the last several days, was outlined in instructional documents obtained exclusively by the Guardian. This move aligns with the administration’s stepped-up efforts to deport people en masse, and it may place some of the most at-risk individuals in immediate danger of being sent away.
Keith Hunsucker, a veteran jurist on the Board of Immigration Appeals, which serves as the appellate arm of the immigration court system, led the seminar titled “Motions to Continue: Efficiently Advancing Cases to Completion.” During his years on the bench before taking on other assignments, Hunsucker rejected more than four out of every five asylum claims, per the Guardian. The central message of the session was to curb postponements in favor of quicker rulings, even in situations where additional time might allow immigrants to secure legal status that would protect them from removal, such as a visa or green card they have already earned or been approved for and are merely waiting to receive. Once someone is deported, certain avenues for remaining in the country are permanently closed off, as the Guardian pointed out.
Particular attention in the training was paid to two specific protections: special immigrant juvenile status, meant for young people who have suffered abuse, abandonment, or neglect, and U visas, which are designed for those who have endured particularly severe crimes. The slides caution that “some continuances are sought solely for the purpose of delay” and that “persons illegally present in the United States who wish to remain have a substantial incentive to prolong litigation so they may avoid deportation as long as possible.” Another slide stated: “Continuance requests solely for dilatory purposes should not be countenanced by Immigration Judges.” The rationale offered was the need to eliminate inefficiency and unnecessary waiting in a system currently burdened with approximately 3.2 million unresolved cases.
Judges were also seemingly steered away from allowing more than 10 days for immigrants to locate an attorney before moving forward, a timeframe that drew sharp criticism. “I thought, who has time to find an attorney in 10 days?” one individual familiar with the training told the Guardian, requesting anonymity due to fear of reprisal. That person added: “There is no room to be kind; there is only urgency to make them leave [the US], one way or the other.”
The immigration courts fall under the executive office for immigration review, a unit housed within the Department of Justice, where the attorney general holds sway over precedential rulings and broader operations. When asked for comment by the Guardian, a DOJ spokesperson, who was not named, issued a statement saying that tackling the court backlog is a top priority for the administration and that the department is “restoring integrity to our immigration system by hearing cases fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly, in accordance with the law.” An EOIR spokesperson, also unnamed, echoed that sentiment, saying the agency “prioritizes the timely completion of all cases” and that judges are bound to follow existing statutes and policies so cases do not stall. “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 spokesperson remarked.
Critics contend that many holdups are not the fault of applicants at all, pointing instead to backlogs and quota systems at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, an agency under the Department of Homeland Security. The training, however, suggests that an approved visa petition should not halt removal proceedings if the actual visa cannot be issued yet because of annual limits, even when it would become available at a later date. This guidance appears to cement a pattern of rapid-fire hearings and accelerated rulings that has become common in immigration courts during the current administration, with postponements granted less frequently and for shorter durations, including in cases involving minors.
The potential for judges to routinely deny requests for more time so that immigrants can obtain legal representation represents a significant setback for those navigating the system alone. Figures from the American Immigration Council show that between 2019 and 2024, only about 25% of immigrants who had lawyers ended up with removal orders, whereas more than 60% of those without counsel faced that outcome. Because the availability of legal help falls far short of the need, merely one in five immigrants in proceedings has an attorney, according to the Guardian.