President Trump Takes The Gloves OFF - Democrat Judges FIRED

Subscribe for free to eliminate ads

Disclaimer: The article may include the author's opinions.

In an effort to better align the courts with immigration enforcement and national security concerns, the Justice Department has moved to remove the sixth immigration judge in San Francisco since President Donald Trump returned to office. According to local media, Shira Levine, the most recent judge to be ousted, joined the court in October 2021 and was not given an official justification for her departure.

Advertisementads

Observers note that the pattern has disproportionately affected judges with histories of high asylum approval rates or careers rooted in immigrant advocacy. In recent months, five other judges, including Chloe Dillon and Elisa Brasil, both noted for some of the highest asylum approval rates in the San Francisco court, were also relieved of their duties. Experts suggest the dismissals reflect a broader shift toward judicial oversight that prioritizes adherence to federal immigration law and enforcement objectives.

Critics have described the removals as ideologically motivated, emphasizing the judges’ prior work representing immigrants in legal proceedings and their tendency to grant asylum more frequently than national averages. Between 2019 and 2024, Levine approved asylum in over 97% of her cases, while Dillon granted 96.5%, compared with a national average of roughly 50% during the same period. While some observers attribute the elevated approval rates to higher levels of legal representation and procedural differences in San Francisco, federal officials have emphasized the need for consistency in applying national standards.

The dismissals have sparked debate over judicial independence. Former San Francisco judge Dana Leigh Marks described the actions as targeting judges who operate independently and apply critical scrutiny rather than deferring automatically to government positions. Others have noted that judges with prosecutorial backgrounds within the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement have largely retained their posts, signaling a shift in the court’s composition toward enforcement-minded perspectives.

The recent changes coincide with broader policy adjustments within the Justice Department. The requirement that temporary immigration judges possess prior immigration law experience has been lifted, and the federal government has authorized military lawyers to fill temporary judicial positions. These measures have been presented as steps to ensure courts are staffed with professionals aligned with federal enforcement priorities, including the administration’s focus on securing borders and enforcing immigration laws.

For the Trump administration, the removals and court adjustments are consistent with a longstanding platform emphasizing strict immigration enforcement, including the prioritization of deportation and the limitation of asylum claims where legal standards are not met. Officials argue that ensuring judicial alignment with federal policies is essential for maintaining public safety and reinforcing the rule of law.