This article has been updated to reflect the latest available data.
At least 800 people were ordered “removed in absentia” when they did not show up for their court hearings at the San Francisco immigration court this week, said Milli Atkinson, director of the Immigrant Legal Defense Program at the San Francisco Bar Association.
Now, they may lose the chance to apply for legal status or protection in the U.S. and could be arrested and deported without a future hearing. The exact number of people who received removal orders might be higher, Atkinson said, since attorneys and court observers weren’t able to attend every hearing.
The number of people scheduled for hearings at the 100 Montgomery St. immigration court from Monday through Wednesday was larger than usual, Atkinson said.
Dana Leigh Marks, who worked as an immigration judge in San Francisco for 35 years until retiring in 2021, said the federal government was likely mass-scheduling hearings in a bid to ramp up deportations.
“They’re counting on these people not showing up, because otherwise you wouldn’t have that many cases on that day,” she said. If everyone scheduled had arrived in court, she added, judges would not be able to hear all their cases.
“They are compromising fairness and due process in order to have dramatic numbers of deportations,” Marks said.
There were so many hearings this week that judges from across the Bay in Concord — Julie Nelson, Marlem Nava and Jacob J. Stender — were presiding over cases.
The San Francisco court has been decimated over the past year and has lost almost all of its judges, with only two judges remaining of the original 21 when President Donald Trump started his term.
The Concord judges heard cases alongside San Francisco judges Frank A. Seminerio and Steven M. Kirchner, and a San Diego judge, Samantha Begovich, who regularly hears cases in the San Francisco immigration court remotely. Atkinson said she had never seen Concord judges brought into San Francisco court.
Shira M. Levine, a former immigration judge who was fired by the Trump administration in September last year, said that in the four years she presided in San Francisco, she would have an average of 30 individuals a day for these kinds of hearings. Of those, about two to four people wouldn’t show up.
This week, however, Mission Local observed that only a small fraction of people scheduled for hearings appeared in court.
Although no-shows to immigration court have increased since ICE began arresting immigrants at courthouses last year, Levine said the high rate of absences this week was alarming.
“It raises concern that it was intentionally calculated to lead to these removal orders in absentia,” she said.
Levine said she knew of asylum-seekers whose hearings had been set “years in the future,” but who were mailed notices telling them to appear this week. “That kind of action is actually calculated to lead to more no-shows because people often will not get those notices in time,” she added.
Levine said there’s a history of problems with “notices to appear” mailed to noncitizens and, if there are spelling mistakes or errors in the addresses, people may never receive the notices. They then risk deportation if they are ordered removed in absentia.
A removal order can have a lasting effect, as people might no longer be able to apply for certain types of immigration relief for the next 10 years.
Immigrants who receive a removal order in absentia can file a motion to reopen their case based on exceptional circumstances, such as serious illness, or if they can prove that they never received notice of their hearing.
“They are going to have a more difficult time moving forward with their cases, and they are at higher risk of being removed and detained,” Atkinson said.
The Executive Office for Immigration Review declined to comment on Mission Local’s questions about this week’s hearings.
“The Executive Office for Immigration Review does not comment on cases before the agency,” said in an email Kathryn Mattingly, EOIR’s press secretary.
Atkinson said she does not yet know if the trend will continue next week, but as of Friday, there were no judges from Concord scheduled to hear cases in San Francisco.
Why would they show up to a corrupted court process and doom themselves to deportation, long imprisonments, mistreatment/torture, and possible death?
I don’t know because they broke the immigration law is one thought. Should we let anyone in without going through the proper channels? Go ahead and try in any other country and the same thing will happen.
I’ve got a russian foster kid, brought here as a child, was abused and abandoned here. She’s literally got a letter from a judge saying she shouldn’t be deported, but no other documentation. Grew up here, been with us for a decade. If I take her to court, I can 100% guarentee she’ll be put on a plane and sent to russia. If there ever is another administration, I hope every single abuse of power that you cheer for is used on you and your family. Maybe they can actually arrest more of these republican pedophiles instead of protecting them and worshiping them while deporting children and grandmothers.
@Malaka – The “proper channels” have been deliberately corrupted to prevent due process. This is just the latest in a series of that corruption.
It’s their responsibility to make a case why they should stay. This is what people want and what we voted for. Celebrate democracy!
they generally do make a case and ICE now waits outside and picks them up **AFTER** judges either accept their reason or offer them later court dates. That’s the entire problem. Why do you think they’d schedule 500 people to come to court when they only have like 5 judges? It’s a dragnet. Has nothing to do with “law”. It’s just your little maga bootliker friends who all said he was going after gang members (who bizarrely seem to be offlimits)
Even if they have a case, and most of them do not, the government is not obligated to grant asylum.
@Nancy T – The phrase “not obligated to” is deceptive. Hearing judges have been told to refuse requests, i.e. not to judge at all, just refuse them. Judges were fired for judging.
It’s a total abuse of our justice system and not due process by any means.
Just stop with the fallacies and sad narrative. “They’re counting on these people not showing up, because otherwise you wouldn’t have that many cases on that day…”
Number one, these people are here, likely illegally, otherwise they would not have a hearing in court.
Number two, if you have a case in court, from a traffic ticket, to a small claims, to a misdemeanor, to an immigration hearing, it is the responsibility of the defendant to show up! Yes, the court makes reasonable accommodations to notify defendants, however, the onus and responsibility lies with the defendants.
Number three, remove the humanitarian/sad/political aspect of this. These folks did not come here via legal pathways, or waiting in line for their turn. If that was the case, the would not have a hearing.
Number four, our legal system is not perfect, it never has been. It is delusional to think or even consider it to be a perfect system, through any administration. If you don’t like the laws, run for office and change them, if you don’t like the laws and don’t want to run for office to change them, then leave! Go find a different country with more appeasing, lenient laws, and see if they fit your lifestyle, political views, or narrative.
We have laws in place, enforcing them should not be an issue.