The immigration court backlog has been brewing for a long time. Currently, in some jurisdictions, immigrants must wait more than four years for their hearing to be scheduled. There are currently approximately 2,000,000 cases pending in immigration courts Across the country. 2 MILLIONS. Of the approximately 2,000,000 cases, only 309,031 files were administratively classified (in immigration court And the Immigration Appeals Board) in the first quarter of 2022. These numbers are staggering.
As immigration courts continue to squat under this backlog, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) and the current administration have implemented ways to address this growing problem. AILA, along with other experts in the field, proposed solutions, some of which appear to be in the mix. However, the implementation of these strategies has been haphazard and inconsistent, often creating further confusion for practitioners, clients, and others. professional respondents.
One of the Biden administration’s promises has been to reduce this backlog. The administration has resorted to tactics such as asylum application processing rules programwhich expedited certain types of asylum cases through the immigration system. Eventually, this program has been paused because it was not viable in conjunction with lifting Title 42. As recently as March 2023, the Biden administration continues to maintain its commitment to reducing the backlog. With the most recent decision of the Supreme Court decision confirming the authority of the executive branch in setting enforcement prioritieswe must continue to work to make the courts more efficient.
As mentioned above, AILA and other experts propose several possible solutions, which detail how the Department of Justice (DOJ) and EOIR can use their authority to expunge large numbers of low-priority enforcement cases and help clarify immigration judges’ records. We saw EOIR introduces certain specialized files which group similar types of cases together. He also published guidelines for pre-hearing conferences which allows both parties to circumscribe the problems and rationalize the file. However, practitioners should clarify with their local EOIR liaison chapters to understand what specialized dockets are in effect in their jurisdiction and whether pre-hearing conferences are in practice.
This is where things get murky. Since specialized cases vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, consistent information on case types, names of these files, and understanding which courts have which files has been a frustrating headache. The situation is similar for pre-hearing conferences. Recently, AILA shared a investigation with our members about specialized cases and pre-hearing conferences to better understand what practitioners are seeing in their jurisdictions. Understanding the practices of different immigration courts is key to assessing whether strategies to combat the backlog actually work.
Most experts and legal practitioners agree that the immigration court backlog is unsustainable and that, now more than ever, we need to put real solutions into practice. By completing the survey, we will be able to better understand one piece of the puzzle. This work is important to assess where due process has been compromised, whether we are indeed creating sustainable policies, and how we can continue to protect vulnerable populations seeking protection.
I encourage all AILA members to complete this investigationso that we can better advocate to EOIR headquarters for practices that are working well and be able to outline the challenges that continue to hold us back.