On a recent Wednesday, Judge Li Eric Wong appeared on a flat screen TV mounted to the wall of a sparely decorated immigration courtroom in Concord, California. He had 91 cases on his calendar for the day.
Up until this year, Wong and other immigration judges generally averaged 20 cases a day, but now, immigration courts across the country are holding “mega master calendar” hearings where upward of 100 cases may be slated for a single hearing.
The new mega-hearings are not about who shows up, say immigration attorneys and advocates, but about those who don’t.
As Judge Samantha Begovich often warns the immigrants in her Concord courtroom, “If you do not show up in court when you are scheduled to appear, I can order you removed in your absence.”
That is happening frequently in Concord, according to new data, and the consequences are dire: A removal order terminates a pending immigration case and acts as an invitation for Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest and deport the subject.
In June, 684 immigrants, or 42 percent of the total number of immigrants with a mega master calendar hearing, were ordered removed in absentia at Concord, according to federal court data analyzed by data analysts Joseph Gunther and Brandon Marrow.
The mega hearings began in Concord on June 1. That is where immigration hearings that were once held in San Francisco have largely moved. The federal government shuttered or dramatically downsized San Francisco’s two immigration courts over the past 18 months.
By the end of this year, all of San Francisco’s hearings will move to the Concord courts.
Former immigration judge Jeremiah Johnson said of the hearings: “It’s a trap for those who do not show up, and a complete waste of time for those who do.”
At the recent hearing in July, only 48 of the 91 immigrants scheduled to appear showed up.
Even for them, the rules have changed. Family members are usually not allowed unless they are named, and only two volunteers are allowed inside each court room to support immigrants.
For those who do show up to the modern office building in a suburban area of Concord, it’s a mostly mundane affair.
The court takes up three of the 10 floors where other establishments, including a financial firm and an urgent care clinic, also have offices. There are 21 courtrooms, although many sit empty as there are only four in-person judges, seven online judges and two visiting judges.
Now, there is a mega master calendar hearing happening most weekdays.
On the Wednesday in July, immigrants awaiting their hearings sat on wooden benches, many with children by their side. During his hearing, an immigrant from Honduras rose from the bench to sit at a small table set up in front of the television monitor where Judge Wong and a translator appeared on the screen.
“What is your name?” Wong asked through an interpreter.
The judge then read out the address he had on file, and asked if it was up to date.
“Si,” the immigrant said. “Yes,” said the translator.
“Do you have an attorney?” the judge asked.
“No, I need more time.”
After a few exchanges about the asylum process, the judge set a hearing for June 26, 2028, the date given to all of the immigrants that day.
And, so the day went. For the next four or so hours, Wong went through the cases of 48 immigrants in much the same manner.
The man — and many of the other immigrants on the docket that day — hadn’t been scheduled to appear in court again and discuss their cases until 2028. But in late May or early June, their court date was suddenly moved up.
That could likely happen again and, again, put their status at risk, said Jere Ramsey, a volunteer data analyst who has been collecting data alongside courtroom observers.
Ramsey calculates that at least 71 percent of those who did not appear at their mega master hearing in June were ordered deported.
Why so many immigrants fail to appear
When someone’s immigration court date is changed, the Executive Office for Immigration Review sends out a letter informing them of their new court date and updates their online portal.
But it’s entirely possible for an immigrant to miss both, said Sergio Lopez, the volunteer coordinator for SAFE Center, a nonprofit that provides all kinds of support to immigrants, including legal support.
Addresses change, and so do attorneys. Some immigrants may not have access to or know how to use a computer. English fluency can be another barrier. And even those who do find out about the change may be too afraid to show up in court.
“People don’t receive the notice in time, they miss it, and some others also get scared and they don’t show,” said Lopez.
“People are terrified,” said Vicky Benavente, a volunteer.
In June, a class-action lawsuit ruled that ICE cannot arrest immigrants outside courthouses. But the courthouse arrests that took place in early 2025 still linger in the minds of immigrants, discouraging them to show up, said Lopez.
Earlier, when master calendar hearings were smaller, it was also more common for immigrants to have an attorney, according to advocates.
Between November 2025 and May 2026, according to the data compiled by Ramsey, 65 percent of immigrants who appeared in Concord did not have an attorney. The consequences are stark: Nationwide, respondents who didn’t have an attorney only won their cases in immigration court in two percent of cases sampled.
Fighting back against removal orders
When someone is ordered removed at immigration hearings they failed to attend, they do have recourse: They can file a motion to reopen their case, or file an appeal within 30 days. But that window only helps an immigrant who discovers they have missed a hearing in time to file. And filing a motion is difficult for those who have no lawyer.
For those who do have a lawyer, the filing fee has become more expensive, shooting up from around $100 to more than $1,000.
Sometimes, after addressing the immigrants who appeared that day, a judge will go through those who did not appear and order a portion of those immigrants deported, on the spot. On the Wednesday in July, Wong did not do this, according to the court observer present.
A day earlier, at the end of an individual hearing, another judge, Jacob Stender, read through a long list of no-shows from his previous mega master docket, ordering dozens of them removed from the country. He referenced each by the first few digits of the so-called A-number used to track immigrants.
As he did this, a volunteer courtroom observer seated in the back row wrote down notes about each case, bearing witness to a seemingly administrative and mundane action that is at once life-or-death for some immigrants — many of who are asylum-seekers — who have been ordered removed to a country where their life may be in danger.
The mega master hearings are just another of the changes under the Trump administration that, immigration advocates and attorneys say, have transformed immigration courts from a pathway for immigrants to legalize their status in this country into a tool to rapidly arrest and deport them.
The Executive Office for Immigration Review thinks otherwise.
When asked questions about the purpose of master calendar hearings, a spokesperson for the agency replied, “Unnecessary delay hurts both aliens with meritorious claims and the American public, who wish to see aliens with non-meritorious claims removed as quickly as possible.”
Immigration mega hearings have been conducted in this country for decades. I know this to be true because I was a volunteer attorney assisting people who were summoned to such hearings in Seattle in the 1990s. What constitutes “due process” in the immigration context has always been interpreted differently from other proceedings under the 5th Amendment. That means that people in deportation proceedings do not have the same package of rights as people accused of criminal offenses. They do not have a right to counsel, to a jury trial or to proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In a mega hearing, the court will ask each person summoned whether they have any evidence that they are in the country legally — such as a visa or a green card. If not, and there is no other reason for which deportation can be stayed, they can be summarily deported. All of this has been going on in the United States for a very long time. I found it brutal and offensive back in the 1990s and I still see it that way now. However, this article presents mega hearings as something new when they are not.
This makes me so sick to my stomach and is heartbreaking. I say we deport the billionaires and keep the immigrants and asylum seekers. The Republicans level of racism is so off the charts they really do want to deport millions of our neighbors.
Hi – The Immigration Institute of the Bay Area is currently providing legal immigration services to unrepresented clients in Concord courts. Please call (510) 451-2846 or visit us at iibayarea.org.
Thank you for covering this important issue. One question I have is whether you’ll also report on what happens to people after these removal orders are issued. The article focuses on the court process, but it doesn’t address what many experience afterward. Some immigrants are held in detention facilities, including private prisons or privately operated detention centers, while awaiting removal. In some cases, individuals may also face imprisonment after being returned to their country of origin or a foreign country they have never been.
Regardless of where someone stands on immigration policy, the humanitarian consequences of detention, imprisonment, family separation, and deportation deserve just as much attention as the courtroom proceedings. Will you be doing a follow-up on what happens to people after these hearings and the human impact of those outcomes?