The Executive Office for Immigration Review, which oversees the nation's immigration courts, has expanded proceedings to new locations that critics describe as difficult for detained individuals and their attorneys to access.
What the Left Is Saying
Democratic lawmakers and progressive advocacy organizations argue that relocating immigration hearings to facilities outside traditional courtrooms undermines due process rights. Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has called for greater transparency in where immigration proceedings are being held. The American Immigration Lawyers Association has documented cases where attorneys report traveling significant distances to reach clients at remote detention facilities, with some describing the arrangements as creating de facto "hidden tribunals" that limit access to counsel.
The National Immigrant Justice Center issued a statement saying these practices "effectively deny immigrants their right to competent legal representation by placing proceedings in locations designed to discourage attorney participation." Organizations including the Southern Poverty Law Center have filed amicus briefs in related litigation arguing that such arrangements violate constitutional due process protections.
What the Right Is Saying
Republican supporters of the administration argue that expanding hearing capacity and using available facilities is a practical response to backlogs in the immigration court system. The Justice Department has defended the use of alternative locations, saying they are legally authorized under existing regulations and expand access to adjudication for detained individuals who might otherwise wait years for proceedings.
Senator John Cornyn of Texas, a Republican who has worked on immigration legislation, noted that the immigration court backlog exceeded 3 million cases before recent changes. "Any administration that expands processing capacity deserves credit, not criticism," Cornyn said at a Senate hearing. Conservative legal commentators have argued that critics overstate access concerns and that detained individuals retain the right to counsel at proceedings held in any authorized location.
What the Numbers Show
According to Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse data from Syracuse University, immigration court backlogs stood at approximately 3.7 million cases as of mid-2026. The average wait time for a hearing date exceeds four years nationally. The Executive Office for Immigration Review reports that it has added hearing capacity at more than 40 facilities previously not used for immigration proceedings since 2025.
The Government Accountability Office issued a report in early 2026 finding that detained individuals reported significantly longer travel times to meet with attorneys when hearings were held at remote locations compared to traditional immigration courts. According to DOJ statistics, the number of immigration judges has increased by approximately 15 percent since 2024, though the ratio of judges to pending cases remains unchanged due to case growth.
The Bottom Line
The expansion of immigration court proceedings to new and remote locations reflects an effort to address a substantial backlog but has raised concerns about access to legal representation. Civil rights advocates are monitoring whether relocated hearings comply with constitutional requirements for due process. Congress may face pressure to hold oversight hearings on the arrangement as both sides prepare for continued litigation over detention and hearing procedures.