Trump Taps Army Reserve for Immigration Judge Shortage/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ The Trump administration is assigning Army Reserve and National Guard lawyers as temporary immigration judges to offset massive judicial vacancies. Critics warn the plan may jeopardize due process and military integrity. Immigration courts now face a backlog exceeding 3.4 million cases.
Military Immigration Courts Plan: Quick Looks
- Over 100 immigration judges recently fired or departed under Trump.
- Administration plans to assign up to 600 military lawyers as judges.
- First wave of 50 Army Reserve JAGs begins six-month posts soon.
- Plan comes amid historic immigration court backlogs topping 3.4 million.
- Military experience in immigration law is limited, raising concerns.
- Critics argue temporary judges lack necessary expertise, risking appeals.
- Posse Comitatus Act concerns emerge among Democratic lawmakers.
- DOJ and Pentagon silent on operational and legal specifics.
Deep Look
Trump Turns to Military Lawyers to Fill Immigration Judge Shortages Amid Legal, Operational Concerns
In a bold and controversial shift, the Trump administration has begun assigning military reserve lawyers from the Army Reserve and National Guard to serve as temporary immigration judges. The move follows the dismissal or resignation of more than 100 immigration judges in recent months and is being pitched as a solution to clear a historic case backlog in U.S. immigration courts — now totaling more than 3.4 million cases.
According to internal communications reviewed by the Associated Press, training for the first group of approximately 50 Army Reserve lawyers will begin immediately, with assignments expected to last six months. An additional group is scheduled for training in spring 2026, and the administration aims to bring in as many as 600 military-trained attorneys for temporary court duty.
An email sent to Reserve Legal Command personnel stated the assignments offer a chance to “gain judicial experience in a high tempo, nationally significant setting.” The notice also called for volunteers with experience in immigration law, administrative law, or prior service as a military judge, though no prior immigration law experience is required.
Ramping Up Immigration Enforcement
This initiative marks another step in President Donald Trump’s intensified immigration crackdown, where military resources have been increasingly used for civil enforcement. Previous efforts have included deploying National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border, using military bases to house detainees, and even employing military aircraft for deportation flights.
But critics say assigning JAGs (Judge Advocate Generals) to act as immigration judges without deep expertise in immigration law threatens the legal integrity of the system. The immigration courts are responsible for critical rulings on asylum, deportation, and residency — often life-altering decisions for immigrants and their families.
“A Dangerous Precedent”
Legal experts and immigration advocates have sounded alarms. Margaret Stock, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and immigration attorney, said, “They’re letting a lot of experienced judges go, terminating them with no notice, and yet they claim there’s a shortage.”
She noted that JAGs receive only limited immigration law training, typically to assist fellow service members with visa applications for spouses or children.
“Immigration law is super technical and complicated. It’s worse than tax law,” she warned.
Historically, immigration judges required at least seven years of relevant legal experience before entering a multi-phase hiring and training process. Until now, even temporary judges were expected to have a decade of experience in immigration-related practice. The Trump administration’s updated rule eliminates those standards, sparking concern that the system is being compromised for political expediency.
Military Experience ≠ Immigration Expertise
While military attorneys are well-trained in national security and criminal prosecution, transitioning to immigration adjudication is a significant leap.
“They’ll need to get up to speed quickly on a very complex body of law,” said Mark Nevitt, a former Navy JAG and professor at Emory University.
Matt Biggs, head of the union representing federal immigration judges, believes this approach will result in more appeals, slower case resolution, and an increase in errors.
“It’s going to be an inefficient and costly endeavor,” he said. “It sets a dangerous precedent in this country when it comes to due process protections.”
Gregory Chen from the American Immigration Lawyers Association echoed that concern, accusing the Justice Department of “watering down the qualifications” of those making life-altering decisions.
“Permanent immigration judges have civil service protections,” he warned, “but these temporary appointments may be more vulnerable to political pressure.”
Legal Gray Areas and Congressional Scrutiny
Some Democratic senators are questioning the legality of the plan, citing potential violations of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits active-duty military personnel from engaging in domestic law enforcement activities. In a letter to top Pentagon legal advisors, lawmakers demanded answers regarding the sourcing of 600 lawyers and the legal review underpinning the initiative.
A Pentagon memo obtained by AP indicated that appointments should not exceed six months and clarified that the Justice Department would be responsible for ensuring compliance with federal law. But legal scholars say the situation remains murky.
“If the military lawyers operate entirely under civilian authority, the plan may be legal,” said Nevitt, “but it’s far from clear at this point.”
Will Military Judges Be Impartial?
Some immigration advocates fear the administration is relying on military personnel under the assumption they will be more likely to issue removal orders in line with Trump’s deportation objectives. But others, including former military attorneys, reject that narrative.
“They will not rubber stamp,” said Greg Rinckey, a former Army lawyer now in private practice. “Many of us served as defense counsel. We’re not all government hacks.”
Rinckey added that some military lawyers are signing up not for political reasons, but to gain experience and serve where they’re needed.
“It’s also a way to build your resume — serving as a judge in a high-profile role,” he said.
Regardless of intent, the impact is already being felt. With only about 600 immigration judges currently serving and the cap fixed at 800, the plan could effectively double the court’s active workforce — but without the legal infrastructure or training protocols typically required.
As training begins and deployments roll out, the legal and ethical implications of this strategy will remain under scrutiny, particularly as appeals mount and the courts face even greater pressure.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.