Immigration Courts Turned into Deportation Traps Under Trump Administration

Wed Nov 19 2025 15:40:11 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

Recent observations reveal a troubling trend in U.S. immigration courts, where instances of families being torn apart and expedited deportations are becoming the norm, raising concerns over the fair trial rights of asylum seekers.

As reported by Associated Press, recent observations in 21 U.S. cities show that immigration courts have transformed into 'deportation traps,' with cases often dismissed to facilitate immediate arrests by federal agents. The trends reflect a significant departure from traditional judicial processes, leading to deep concerns about due process and fairness.

This year, Associated Press reporters observed immigration court proceedings across 21 U.S. cities. Many hearings concluded with cases dismissed by the government, allowing agents to arrest immigrants in courthouse hallways. Reports also indicate that this practice is backed by internal records and communication between lawyers from the Department of Justice and representatives from the Department of Homeland Security.

One government lawyer expressed the emotional toll of these proceedings, stating, “I can’t do this,” during a message sent to an immigration agent positioned nearby. There is a growing concern among legal professionals about the moral implications of a system that increasingly appears to prioritize deportation over justice.

During a recent session, a Cuban asylum seeker, alongside his wife and infant child, was under the impression he was entering a routine court appointment. Instead, after his asylum claim was summarily dismissed, he was tackled by plainclothes agents waiting outside. His family’s cries echoed in the courthouse, further illuminating the distressing reality of immigrant families confronting the judicial system.

These practices, described as new and aggressive tactics pushed by the Trump administration, have sparked nationwide outrage. Recent data suggests that this shift reflects a broader initiative aimed at reshaping immigration policies, while also highlighting a significant backlash against traditional judicial processes. Many observers now characterize these immigration courts as assembly-line systems, where due process for vulnerable individuals is swiftly overshadowed by an agenda oriented towards rapid deportations.

There are concerns that the discharged immigration judges, often seen as too lenient, reflect the administration's contempt for traditional judicial norms. These developments indicate that immigration courts are increasingly viewed as instruments of detention rather than venues for legal justice.

The stark reality faced by many asylum seekers and immigrants in America today is underscored by harrowing accounts of families being forcibly separated during what they believed were standard court hearings. Data from the Cato Institute highlights that most detainees have no criminal convictions, contradicting narratives pushed by certain political factions.

With escalating pressures and ongoing changes, many immigrants are opting for self-deportation to avoid harsher consequences, marking a troubling trend in immigration policy execution.