FOIA UPDATE: Twenty Immigration Judges Fired. DOJ Says Zero Records Exist?

A FOIA request reveals what the government doesn’t want to admit: judges are being replaced without a paper trail.

On February 14, 2025, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) terminated twenty immigration judges. Quietly. No public statement. No explanation. Most, if not all, were confirmed to be Biden appointees.

---

So, on May 29th, 2025. I filed a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) to find out what happened next.

I asked for:

• Names of any new judges or staff hired since the firings

• Dates of appointment

• Court assignments

• Vacancy announcements

• Selection memos

• Internal hiring documents

In other words, who is replacing these judges, and how?

Because when twenty adjudicators are removed, people who make decisions that affect the lives of asylum seekers and immigrants, there should be a clear and transparent hiring process. That is not optional. That is fundamental.

---

---

What EOIR did

First, they acknowledged my request on May 29.

They said it was being processed under “Track Two,” which is their category for relatively simple FOIA requests. But they also flagged “unusual circumstances,” which means they were taking a ten-day extension. That’s legal under FOIA when a request requires a lot of searching or coordination.

Then they set up a PAL (Public Access Link) account for me to track the request.

They repeated the “unusual circumstances” language again. They claimed the delay was needed because it would require a search across field offices, consultations with other departments, or the review of a large amount of material.

So to be clear, EOIR told me the request was complex enough to justify a delay.

The next day, on May 30, they issued their final response:

“A search was conducted; however, no records responsive to your request were located. Accordingly, this request has been administratively closed.”

That’s it. One sentence. They said no documents exist.

They also included a paragraph stating that certain law enforcement and national security records are excluded from FOIA, but this was not tied to my request in any meaningful way. It was just generic legal filler but felt like a really odd thing to add on.

---

What this actually means

EOIR is claiming that:

• No new immigration judges or staff have been hired since February 14

• Or no records were created that show it

• Or no one could find those records

• Or they did not actually look

None of these possibilities make sense.

If EOIR really has not hired anyone, we have a problem. Immigration courts are overwhelmed with millions of pending cases. Removing twenty judges without hiring replacements would cause backlogs to explode.

If hiring is in progress, there should be vacancy announcements, interview schedules, internal memos, or emails. There is no such thing as a silent hiring process inside the federal government.

If the records do exist and EOIR is refusing to release them, they need to say so and cite an actual exemption. They did not.

And if they did not look at all, then they have failed their legal obligation under FOIA to conduct a good faith search.

---

Why this matters

Immigration judges do not just process paperwork. They decide who gets deported. Who gets asylum. Who goes to detention. Who walks free. They make decisions that carry enormous weight.

So when twenty of them are removed and no one can explain who is taking their place or how that process works, it becomes more than a staffing question. It becomes a threat to due process and public trust.

This raises serious questions.

• Was this politically motivated?

• Are judges being selected behind closed doors?

• Is ideology playing a role in who gets removed or hired?

• Why is there no transparency at all?

What I’m doing now

I have filed a formal appeal as of today. EOIR’s claim that “no records exist” does not pass the smell test. It does not hold up legally, logically, or ethically.

Under FOIA law, agencies are required to conduct a thorough and reasonable search. Responding in less than 24 hours after claiming the request was unusually complex does not meet that standard.

If the records exist, they need to release them or justify the redaction.

If they do not exist, EOIR should provide a sworn explanation of how the agency terminated twenty judges without creating a single record about replacements or next steps.

Because silence is not transparency, and when it comes to the courts deciding people’s futures, silence is not acceptable.

---

Note From The Author:

I don’t put my work behind a paywall. These stories are too urgent, too raw, too real to keep locked away.

But independent journalism takes time, risk, and resources. If you value reporting that doesn't flinch, that names names and shows receipts, please consider subscribing.

To stay in the loop, you can subscribe for free. It helps build awareness and keeps the pressure on but a paid subscription helps me keep digging, filing FOIAs, verifying sources, and staying on the story long after the headlines fade.

I’m not part of the mainstream press. I won’t sanitize what’s happening. I’ll just tell it like it is.

Thank you for being here.

— Dissent ♥