The San Francisco immigration court is now empty, with no cases being heard and no legal practitioners presenting arguments. Once staffed by 21 judges when President Donald Trump took office, the court was left with only two judges before closing its doors on May 1. This change follows a significant reduction in the number of immigration judges due to a White House-led dismissal of federal immigration judges.
This closure is part of a broader disruption affecting the immigration court system as the administration seeks to address a backlog of 3.8 million asylum cases and enhance deportation efforts. Asylum denial rates have increased sharply after the dismissal of nearly 100 judges perceived as lenient, with military lawyers stepping in as replacements. Moreover, immigrants have been apprehended at courthouses or government offices during scheduled hearings.
San Francisco is now the first significant city without a central immigration court, creating a chaotic scenario in a region known for its supportive stance towards asylum seekers. The two remaining judges will continue their work from another federal building in San Francisco but will report to an immigration court located across the bay.
Former judge Jeremiah Johnson, who was dismissed in November and now serves as executive vice president of the National Association of Immigration Judges, remarked, “It was a vibrant legal scene and so I think if you were looking to target a court you would have to look at what San Francisco stands for.”
A majority of the 117,000 cases from San Francisco have been transferred to a courthouse in Concord, approximately 30 miles away. This courthouse, opened two years ago to alleviate San Francisco’s case backlog, is also experiencing turmoil. Initially staffed by 11 judges at the start of 2025, the number has dwindled to five due to further dismissals, with a caseload of 60,000 even before the addition of San Francisco’s cases.
San Francisco’s court had the nation’s third-highest volume of asylum cases and was considered favorable to asylum seekers. Between 2019 and 2024, nearly 75% of applicants received relief compared to 43% nationally, according to data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University. This success was partly due to a strong network of immigrant advocacy groups and legal aid.
The Executive Office of Immigration Review, part of the Department of Justice overseeing immigration courts, announced in March the planned 2027 closure of the San Francisco court for cost efficiency, with cases moving to Concord. However, nearly all judges departed early, prompting the closure. The Executive Office cited a lease non-renewal decision but provided no detailed explanations.
Tight Security in Concord Courts
With the influx of cases, security measures at the Concord courthouse are stringent. Visitors are screened for weapons or explosives, and cell phones must be turned off. Only transparent bottles of water are permitted.
Judah Lakin, an immigration lawyer from Oakland and a UC Berkeley School of Law instructor, noted that the San Francisco court’s closure complicates case logistics, as clients must travel long distances to Concord. A recent brief hearing required over two hours of travel for him.
Lakin described the challenges faced under the Trump administration, including frequent judge dismissals leading to canceled hearings and prolonged legal uncertainty for clients, often resulting in deportations.
One of his clients was provisionally granted asylum by a judge who was subsequently dismissed. The case shifted to another judge, who also faced dismissal, leaving the client in limbo with a third judge. “The ground is constantly shifting underneath your feet,” Lakin said. “I think that’s on purpose. That’s by design. It’s part of the strategy,” he added.
San Francisco’s Immigration Court Dismantled
The San Francisco immigration court traditionally hired judges from non-prosecutorial backgrounds, many with experience supporting immigrants in legal contexts. The court’s closure is “heartbreaking,” according to Dana Leigh Marks, a former judge who retired in 2021 after a 35-year tenure. Marks views the closure as part of efforts to undermine due process and asylum pathways.
“It’s all a part of big ways and little ways that the Trump administration is trying to get non-citizens out of the country,” she stated.
Fired judge Jeremiah Johnson, appointed during Trump’s first term, believes his dismissal was due to his high asylum grant rate of 89%. “You don’t fire judges if you disagree with the way they’re handling a case, that’s not how courts work,” he said, noting few of his decisions were appealed.
Unlike federal courts with strict procedural rules and lifetime-tenured judges, immigration courts under the Justice Department allow for judge dismissals with minimal constraints. The number of immigration judges nationwide has decreased from 754 to approximately 600, including temporary appointees, due to various factors.
The shift to Concord court has mixed impacts. Attorney Nidaa Pervaiz, representing a client from Nepal, finds the new location more convenient but notes the reduced number of judges delays hearings, affecting clients’ legal status. “Their whole lives are at stake, and they are coming to make a plea for their future,” she expressed.
