Congressional Democrats are raising alarms over the Trump administration’s decision to deploy up to 600 military lawyers as temporary immigration judges.

In a September 15 letter to the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), four senior House Democrats expressed “grave concern” over the administration’s plan to double the number of immigration judges using military personnel with no immigration law experience. The letter was signed by Representatives Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Ranking Member of the Immigration, Integrity, Security, and Enforcement Subcommittee; Jamie Raskin (MD-08), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee; Jasmine Crockett (TX-30), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Oversight; and Henry “Hank” Johnson Jr. (GA-04), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet.

On August 28, EOIR published a final rule eliminating previous requirements for temporary immigration judges, which had mandated candidates be former appellate immigration judges, EOIR administrative law judges, or attorneys with more than 10 years of immigration law experience. This rule change was immediately followed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authorizing the deployment of 600 military lawyers to serve as temporary immigration judges for six-month renewable terms.

The initiative comes as immigration courts face an unprecedented backlog of 3.8 million cases. However, Democrats argue the shortage is largely self-inflicted, noting that 100 immigration judges, or nearly 16 percent of the current workforce, have been fired or chose retirement since the Trump administration began in January 2025. Immigration hearings nationwide are being delayed due to judge shortages at many courts.

The congressional letter outlines several critical concerns about the military lawyer deployment:

Complexity of Immigration Law: Democrats say that immigration law is considered “one of the most complex areas of federal law, second only to the U.S. Tax Code.”

Due Process Violations: The lawmakers argue that bringing in hundreds of judges for potentially only six-month periods is “a recipe for further chaos in the immigration courts” and “undermines our entire immigration system and due process, weakening individuals’ ability to get a fair day in court.”

Inadequate Support Structure: The letter notes that there has been no indication that additional translators, clerks, and administrative staff are being hired to support these new, untrained judges.

The Democrats are demanding information from EOIR by September 29.

• Specific training details for military attorneys, including the number of training hours and whether they will receive mentorship from experienced judges
• Clarification on salary arrangements and whether EOIR will pay the military attorneys during their detail
• Information about case assignment limitations, particularly whether temporary judges will handle unaccompanied children’s cases and receive specialized training
• Details about the maximum length of military attorney assignments, given Secretary Hegseth’s indication that six-month terms could be extended.

The House letter follows similar concerns raised by 12 Democratic senators from the Senate Armed Services Committee, who argue the plan may violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts military involvement in law enforcement. 

The Trump administration justifies the unprecedented move by citing the massive case backlog and arguing that previous qualification requirements were overly restrictive. EOIR claims that immigration law experience is not always a strong predictor of success as an immigration judge and notes it has hired successful judges from other federal agencies without prior immigration experience.