Judges don’t always end their service after they officially leave office. Many continue to don their robes, filling vacancies caused by vacation, retirement or recusals. Could their experience, knowledge of the law and their willingness to serve help them reduce our country’s huge backlog of immigration cases?
It’s worth consideration.
Just how bad is our immigration problem? Consider this: Donald Trump’s presidency and the COVID-19 pandemic combined to reduce applications for U.S. visas drastically, and we still have a backlog of more than 9.5 million applications for entry and residency visas. The easing of the pandemic, President Joe Biden’s promise to return to more humane immigration policies and unrest overseas all are sure to increase migration drastically.
Biden last week announced that our country would accept up to 100,000 people fleeing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This is in addition to a previously announced increase of 125,000 asylum visas to existing refugee quotas. Also, people coming here to escape the Taliban regime that took over Afghanistan after the United States left that country have been granted temporary protected status, and those who helped U.S. forces during our Afghan occupation are eligible for special immigrant visas. More than 74,000 Afghans came here immediately after U.S. troops left the country in August.
We’re not ready for these new waves of refugees. Due to the number of asylum applications we already have, the administration hasn’t been able to fully rescind Trump’s Title 42 controls that stopped the acceptance of refugees on the basis that the global pandemic made immigrants a public health risk.
Biden last week announced plans to hire more caseworkers and special asylum officers. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, however, told reporters earlier this month that Citizenship and Immigration Services, which handles visas, is in tough straits. He said the previous administration “virtually dismantled” USCIS, and it would have to hire 800 new workers and spend $180 million just to process 75,000 cases per year — against a backlog that’s 9.5 million and growing. The reduction of cases meant a reduction of fee revenue, leaving the agency, which runs largely on those fees, close to insolvency.
This is where former court judges might help. They know the law and probably have dealt with victims of abuse and crime — the kind of people who often seek asylum. They probably wouldn’t need much more than a review of special immigration laws in order to augment existing USCIS courts.
Former judges’ expertise could help them hear and render decisions more quickly, giving final action on cases that already have been pending, in some cases for several years.
DHS should consider extending offers to former jurists; they might find a healthy supply of qualified, experienced jurists who could be contracted to decide immigration cases, even on a part-time basis.
Our need to decide the fate of millions of immigrants is dire, and every option should be explored. Temporary use of retired criminal and civil court judges is worth a look.