Immigration courts in the United States are issuing deportation orders at a sharply higher rate as judges are assigned increasingly crowded dockets and many people are given less time to prepare for hearings, according to new data analysed by the nonprofit Mobile Pathways.
The figures point to a significant procedural shift in immigration courts under the Trump administration, which has sought to reduce a long running backlog of cases. The approach has included large “master calendar” hearing days, known by court staff and lawyers as “mega” hearings, where individual judges may have dozens or even more than 100 cases listed on a single docket.
Mobile Pathways, which tracks immigration court data for migrants, lawyers and community organisations, found that more than 1,300 such hearings were held in June. That was nearly three times the number recorded in the same month a year earlier, according to the organisation’s analysis.
At the same time, the group said many people in proceedings are receiving far less notice of their hearing dates. In some cases, the preparation period has fallen from around six months to just over a month. Immigration proceedings can involve complex legal filings, evidence from overseas and applications for protection such as asylum.
The consequences are significant because a person who does not attend an immigration court hearing can be ordered removed in absentia. That means the court can issue a deportation order without the person present if the judge finds that proper notice was given and the individual failed to appear. In many cases, an asylum claim is then treated as abandoned.
Mobile Pathways said the national rate of missed immigration court hearings was about 20 per cent in January 2025, at the start of the second Trump administration. By June, as notice periods shortened, the no show rate had doubled to about 40 per cent, according to the organisation.
Deportation orders have risen in parallel. The group’s data indicates that immigration courts issued almost 33,000 deportation orders in January 2025, compared with about 79,000 in June. Mobile Pathways also said the rate of cases treated as abandoned is now nearly five times the historical average dating back to 2009, with higher increases in cities including New York and Chicago.
Bartlomiej Skorupa, chief operating officer of Mobile Pathways, said the combination of shorter notice and crowded schedules meant some claims were ending before they had been fully considered. He said the data showed that potentially valid cases were being closed without adjudication on their merits.
The Executive Office for Immigration Review, the Justice Department body that oversees immigration courts, said judges were modifying schedules to complete cases more efficiently while ensuring they were handled fairly and lawfully. The office said delays can harm migrants with valid claims, and that the public interest is served when people without a legal basis to remain are removed.
Supporters of stricter immigration enforcement say faster processing is a necessary response to a system that has often taken years to reach final decisions. Andrew Arthur, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, said a system that does not conclude cases lacks credibility. He also said there was a risk in assigning too many matters to judges if it affected performance or raised due process concerns.
Master calendar hearings are generally preliminary proceedings. Judges may confirm a person’s identity, address, representation status and the type of relief being sought. They can also set deadlines for filings and schedule future hearings. Although they are not usually full trials on the merits, they are an important stage because missed appearances can lead to immediate removal orders.
Reports from individual courthouses show how heavy the dockets have become. In Harlingen, Texas, people attending court on large hearing days have waited outside and in crowded public areas before being called in. Adults often arrive with relatives or lawyers, while children in custody may be brought by shelter case managers and legal advocates.
On one recent day there, Immigration Judge Delia Gonzalez had about 90 cases listed. More than 20 people did not appear. Even after the missed hearings, the judge was unable to complete all matters and rescheduled some people who had waited for hours.
Former immigration judge Elizabeth Young said there are practical limits to the number of cases a judge can hear carefully in a single morning. She said very large dockets risk turning court sessions into the processing of a list rather than individual hearings.
Some migrants appearing in Harlingen requested more time. According to accounts from the court, several said they had been misled by dishonest lawyers, while others who had no legal representation said they needed time to understand evidence filing requirements. A Colombian asylum seeker who had already submitted more than 1,500 pages of material said he was seeking further documents from people in his home country. The requests were denied, and many cases lasted only a few minutes.
Similar pressures have been reported elsewhere. In West Valley City, Utah, Immigration Judge Brock Taylor was assigned 159 cases on one day. By midday, he had called the names of several people from countries including Mexico, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela who did not appear. After stating that they had been properly notified, he ordered them removed and said they had no right to appeal.
Lawyers for migrants say the pace has created practical obstacles for clients and attorneys alike. In Chicago, attorney Peter Meinecke of the Resurrection Project said one client received a removal order after being unable to attend a hearing in Seattle because a vehicle accident had fractured both his legs and left him using a wheelchair.
Alex McGriff, an attorney with the National Immigrant Justice Center, said some people had received removal orders even after arriving at the building that houses the Chicago immigration court, because they were confused about where to go or how to obtain help. He said those individuals were treated as absent despite being inside the courthouse.
The acceleration is occurring against the backdrop of one of the largest court backlogs in the US legal system. The immigration court backlog, which grew substantially during the Biden administration, has recently begun to fall. Pending cases before the Executive Office for Immigration Review decreased from about 3.7 million to 3.5 million in fiscal year 2025 and continued to decline, according to the data cited in the source material.
Arthur said larger dockets can conserve judicial time and produce more final orders, thereby reducing the backlog. However, he acknowledged that managing cases at that scale can be difficult.
Immigration attorneys say the same pressure is being felt by legal representatives, especially in areas with high caseloads. Jaime Diez, a veteran immigration lawyer in Brownsville, Texas, said he recently had nearly 20 cases called in a single day, far above his usual pace. He described the situation as troubling and raised concerns about due process.
The data shows that immigration courts are resolving more cases, but it also raises questions about whether people in proceedings are receiving a meaningful opportunity to attend, prepare and present claims. As the backlog continues to shape federal immigration policy, the central legal issue is whether speed can be increased without undermining the fairness required in court proceedings.
