Another gavel silenced in San Francisco as the Trump administration sends Judge Shira Levine packing, marking the sixth immigration judge ousted from the city since the president took office.
NBC News reported that since January, nearly 30% of San Francisco’s immigration judges have been shown the door, with Levine’s termination on Wednesday coming hot on the heels of Judge Chloe Dillon’s exit in August.
Levine, appointed under the Biden administration in 2021, isn’t some rookie—yet she’s out, despite being past her two-year probationary period, just like recent casualties Judge Ila Deiss and Judge Chloe Dillon.
This isn’t just a local shuffle; it’s a pattern that’s got folks scratching their heads, especially when immigration courts are drowning in a record backlog with waits stretching three to four years between hearings.
While desperate migrants wait in limbo, the administration is bizarrely easing qualifications to hire temporary judges—up to 600 military lawyers, per a recent memo—while axing experienced hands like Levine.
Speaking of Levine, data from Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse shows she granted asylum in over 97% of her cases—an eyebrow-raising stat, though experts warn against judging solely by numbers due to variables like location and legal representation.
Still, a Department of Justice memo from last month hints at targeting judges with “statistically improbable” case outcomes, suggesting the Attorney General can hire and fire at will since these judges are “inferior officers.”
Curiously, sources doubt judges with abysmally low asylum grant rates—some below 5%—will face the same heat, which smells like a selective broom sweeping out those deemed too lenient.
A former colleague of Levine didn’t mince words, stating, “Another experienced judge has been fired without cause.”
They added, “The administration is systematically dismantling the immigration courts and any semblance of due process in immigration proceedings.” Well, that’s a spicy take, but when nearly a third of a city’s judges are gone, it’s hard to argue the system isn’t being rocked.
The Department of Justice memo itself offers a cryptic defense: “In a vacuum, it is inappropriate to evaluate an adjudicator’s impartiality or performance simply by reference to the outcomes of cases.”
It continues, “However, there are limits, and adjudicator independence does not mean consistently deciding cases based on personal beliefs at odds with applicable law.”
Fair point—judges aren’t emperors—but firing without public explanation fuels suspicion of a political agenda over genuine oversight.
Look, immigration policy is a mess, and conservatives like myself want borders secured and laws enforced, but transparency matters; if these firings are about restoring balance, why the secrecy, especially when the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review declined to comment on Levine’s exit?
At the end of the day, with courts backlogged and experienced judges being replaced by temporary hires, the real losers are those stuck in the system—migrants and citizens alike—waiting for a fair shot at justice while the administration plays musical chairs with the bench.