SAN FRANCISCO (Diya TV) — The Trump administration has removed another immigration judge in San Francisco, marking the sixth termination from the city’s immigration court since January. Judge Shira Levine was dismissed on Wednesday, less than two weeks after Judge Chloe Dillon was also let go. Levine’s firing has raised new concerns among attorneys, judges, and advocates who say the administration is reshaping the nation’s immigration courts. Critics argue that these actions threaten due process and undermine confidence in the judicial system.
With Levine’s dismissal, almost 30% of San Francisco’s immigration judges have now been terminated during Trump’s time in office. The removals extend beyond San Francisco as well. Two judges assigned to the Concord immigration court were also fired earlier this year.
The firings come as the United States faces a record backlog in immigration cases. It is now common for immigrants to wait three or four years for a hearing. Despite the urgent need for judges, the administration has repeatedly reduced the bench while also easing requirements for temporary replacements.
Levine was known for granting asylum in the vast majority of her cases. According to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, her asylum grant rate exceeded 97%. Other recently terminated San Francisco judges, including Ila Deiss and Chloe Dillon, also had high asylum approval rates. Many in the legal community believe judges with higher approval records are being singled out.
Immigration attorneys caution that asylum statistics can be misleading. Outcomes often depend on location, the availability of legal representation, and the origins of immigrants seeking protection. San Francisco, for example, has a higher percentage of represented asylum seekers, which may influence approval rates.
Last month, the Department of Justice released a memo outlining its authority to review immigration judges based on “statistically improbable” case outcomes. The document stated that adjudicators cannot base rulings solely on personal beliefs or preferences.
“Independence and impartiality do not mean that an adjudicator can consistently decide cases based on personal policy preferences,” the memo said.
The DOJ also emphasized that immigration judges are considered “inferior officers” who serve at the discretion of the Attorney General. That designation makes them subject to both appointment and removal.
At the same time judges are being dismissed, the administration has taken steps to bring in temporary replacements. This week, officials authorized as many as 600 military lawyers to serve as immigration judges. Critics argue that the administration is stacking the courts with individuals more likely to align with Trump’s immigration agenda.
“Another experienced judge has been fired without cause,” said one former colleague of Levine. “The administration is dismantling the immigration courts and any semblance of due process.”
While judges with high asylum approval rates face termination, sources who spoke with NBC Bay Area say judges with extremely low rates are not being targeted. Some judges in other jurisdictions approve fewer than 5% of asylum cases, according to TRAC data.
That apparent imbalance has fueled accusations of political interference. Advocates argue the firings will discourage judges from ruling in favor of asylum seekers, even when cases are strong. The Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review has so far declined to discuss the recent firings. Officials did not respond to requests for comment regarding Levine’s dismissal.
