On April 11, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a striking new directive that could dramatically reshape the way asylum cases are handled in immigration court. In a memo released by Sirce Owen, the acting director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), immigration judges were told to immediately identify and close out asylum cases that “do not have viable legal paths for relief or protection from removal”—even without holding a full hearing.
This memo, which took effect the same day it was issued, marks a sharp escalation in the Trump administration's already aggressive immigration enforcement agenda. The stated goal: reduce the overwhelming immigration court backlog and accelerate deportations. But at what cost?
Asylum Without a Day in Court
Under the new policy, immigration judges—who are employees of the Department of Justice, not independent jurists—are encouraged to deny asylum claims on procedural grounds without allowing individuals the opportunity to fully present their cases. This sidesteps the foundational principles of due process and raises serious constitutional concerns, particularly given the life-and-death nature of many asylum claims.
This move mirrors policies enacted during the Trump administration's first term, which were later rolled back under President Biden. But with a new urgency to overhaul the immigration system and fulfill campaign promises around mass deportation, the administration appears to be reviving and intensifying these tactics.
A System Under Siege
There are more than two million cases pending in U.S. immigration courts. As many as half of these involve asylum seekers—many of whom entered the U.S. fleeing persecution and presented themselves to border agents to request protection, a lawful act under both U.S. and international law.
However, the reality is grim: in fiscal year 2024, only 12% of asylum cases were granted. Around 14% were denied outright, while the rest were abandoned, administratively closed, or terminated. Now, with the latest DOJ directive, a growing number of those remaining cases may be resolved summarily—without the safeguard of a hearing, without a judge hearing from the applicant, and without consideration of new or evolving facts.
Deportation at All Costs?
This policy shift arrives amid broader, troubling developments. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is seeking contracts worth up to $45 billion to expand detention capacity, suggesting that the administration is not only preparing for faster deportations—but also mass detentions. At the same time, reports indicate that El Salvador, a country receiving deportees, is doubling the capacity of its already notorious prison system—some of which now house returned migrants from the U.S.
The administration's endgame is clear: ramp up removals, clear dockets, and send a message that the U.S. will not be a sanctuary for those seeking refuge. But in doing so, it risks discarding basic legal protections enshrined in U.S. law and international treaties.
The Fight for Fairness
At Saluja Law, we remain deeply concerned about this memo's implications. Denying people their right to be heard in court undermines the very foundation of our legal system. As immigration attorneys, we've seen firsthand how vital it is for asylum seekers to have their full stories heard before decisions are made—especially when those decisions can mean the difference between life and death.
We urge all stakeholders—lawmakers, attorneys, advocates, and the public—to remain vigilant. Justice should not be sacrificed for expediency. The backlog crisis in immigration courts is real, but the solution must not come at the expense of fairness, humanity, and the rule of law.
If you or someone you know has an asylum case pending, now is the time to seek legal counsel. Saluja Law is here to help ensure that your voice is heard and your rights protected.
Contact us at www.salujalaw.com or call for a consultation.