>>> THE APPARENT POLITICIZATION OF IMMIGRATION COURTS IS SETTING UP ALARM BELLS WITH DOZENS OF JUDGES FIRED UNDER PRESIDENT TRUMP'S SECOND TERM.

URGENT QUESTIONS ABOUT JUDICIAL PROCESS AND IMMIGRATION JUDGE GEORGE AND JENNIFER PATENT JOINED MICHELLE MARTIN TO SPEAK OUT ABOUT WHAT IT'S LIKE TO SUDDENLY DISMISS AND WHAT ACTION THEY ARE TAKING.

>> JENNIFER AND GEORGE, THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING WITH US TODAY.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THE REASON WE ARE SPEAKING TO YOU IS THAT MORE THAN 100 IMMIGRATION JUDGES IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS HAVE BEEN FIRED, RESIGNED OR RESIGNED UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION OFTEN WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC EXPLANATION AND YOU ARE TWO OF THEM.

I'M GOING TO START WITH YOU, JENNIFER.

YOU SERVED AS AN IMMIGRATION JUDGE IN CHICAGO AND BECAME A SUPERVISING JUDGE.

WHAT DID YOUR ROLL INVOLVE?

>> AS IN AC IJ BY CHICAGO CART, AND INCLUDING APPLICATIONS FOR ASYLUM WHERE SOMEONE HEARS RETURN TO HOME COUNTRY BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED OR MIGHT HAVE BEEN.

FAMILY BASED APPLICATION ON A DAILY BASIS WILL BE ASSIGNED DIFFERENT KINDS OF CASES TO HEAR AND ADJUDICATE WITHIN THE CONFINES PROVIDED BY THE IMMIGRATION LAWS AND AUTHORITIES.

>> AS I UNDERSTAND IT A COUPLE OF DECADES IN PRIVATE IMMIGRATION LAW BEFORE YOU ACCEPT A JUDGE SHIP IN MASSACHUSETTS.

CAN YOU TELL ME AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN, WHY WERE YOU AT THE TO THE WORK?

>> FOR 20 YEARS BEFORE I BECAME A JUDGE AND I BECAME --HAD MY OWN LAW FIRM.

PRIOR TO THAT AND IMPORT EXPORT AND ALSO-RAN LAW SCHOOL FOR 20 YEARS.

I BROUGHT A LOT OF EXPERIENCE TO THE BENCH.

WE LEGAL EXPERIENCE GAVE ME OPPORTUNITY TO HIT THE GROUND 20 YEARS PRIOR TO BEING A JUDGE, AND EMPATHIZED WITH THE STORIES OF IMMIGRANTS AND I HAD COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THEY WERE GOING THROUGH THAT GAVE ME EMPATHY THAT IS NOT NORMALLY THERE.

OF COURSE, THE EXPENSE AHEAD WITH THE U.S. CIS AGENCY, IMMIGRATION COURTS, FEDERAL COURTS GAVE ME A GOOD BACKGROUND BEFORE I BECAME A JUDGE.

I BASICALLY WANTED TO BECOME A JUDGE, BECAUSE I REALLY WANTED TO HELP DEAL WITH THE BACKLOG.

WHEN I WAS ASKED BY MY INTERVIEWERS, WHY DO YOU WANT TO BECOME A JUDGE?

I'M HERE TO HELP YOU AND I WILL GIVE YOU MY EXPERIENCE AND I WANT TO SERVE, SO THAT'S HOW I GOT TO BE A JUDGE.

>> MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT YOU ARE STILL SERVING ON THE BENCH THIS YEAR AND WHAT YOU NOTICED THAT OTHER JUDGES AROUND YOU WERE STARTING TO LOSE THEIR JOBS.

CAN YOU REMIND US, WHAT WAS IT LIKE AND WHAT DO YOU SEE?

>> IT'S A DARK CLOUD.

THE TONE OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION WAS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE THAT BEGAN TO CHANGE AND YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER RIGHT AFTER INAUGURATION WITHIN HOURS ARE COMPLETE LEADERSHIP WAS FIRED AND OUR ACTING DIRECTOR WAS FIRED AND THE CHIEF IMMIGRATION JUDGE WAS FIRED.

THE GENERAL COUNSEL WAS FIRED AND ANOTHER LEADERSHIP WAS FIRED.

WE EXPECT THERE IS GOING TO BE CHANGES FROM ADMINISTRATION TO ADMINISTRATION, BUT IT HAPPENED SO QUICKLY THAT WE SAW CHANGE, BUT WITHIN WEEKS OF THAT, WE HAD OUR FIRST MASS FIRING OF IMMIGRATION JUDGES AROUND FEBRUARY 13.

AROUND 13 JUDGES WERE FIRED AT THE SAME TIME NATIONWIDE AND IT'S A HUGE RED FLAG FOR THOSE OF US PRESENTING ON THE BENCH.

IT WAS THE OPENING GAMBIT AND NOT THE END, BUT IT WAS THE BEGINNING.

WE HAD ANOTHER MASS FIRING OF ABOUT EIGHT JUDGES AND THREE WERE IN MY COURT IN AFTER THAT FIRING, THE JUDGE THAT WAS RETAINED WAS FORMERLY WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

AFTER THAT EVENT, MORALE PLUMMETED AT IMMIGRATION COURTS.

WE SAW MASS FIRINGS AND PEOPLE STARTED TO RESIGN.

AT THIS POINT, IMMIGRATION JUDGES STARTED TO RESIGN OR TOOK EARLY RETIREMENT AND WE PROBABLY LOST ANOTHER FOUR JUDGES BECAUSE OF THAT.

REALLY LOW SPOT WAS WHEN A NAVY VETERAN, 20 YEAR NAVY VETERAN WHO WAS A JUDGE WAS FIRED.

HE WAS WITH ME IN THERE EVERY DAY AND WAS A GREAT JUDGE.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THEY CAN FIRE A LOYAL VETERAN AFTER 20 YEARS.

>> WHEN WERE FIRED, WHAT DID THEY SAY AND HOW DID IT HAPPEN?

>> IT CAME BY EMAIL ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON AROUND 3:30.

TO SUMMARIZE WHAT IT SAID IT WAS BASICALLY THREE OR FOUR SENTENCES AND IT SAID, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE TWO OF THE CONSTITUTION, THE ATTORNEY YOUR PROBATIONARY STATUS.

YOUR TERM OF EMPLOYMENT WILL END ON A CERTAIN DATE.

PLEASE RETURN YOUR EQUIPMENT AT THE END OF THE DAY AND THAT WAS IT AND IT WAS SIGNED BY DIRECTOR OF THE OIR NOTHING ELSE.

>> YOU SERVED LONGER, SO YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED A CHANGE OF MINISTRATIONS BEFORE.

HAVE YOU EVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS?

>> NEVER.

I WAS APPOINTED IN 2016 UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA AND THEY WORKED UNDER THE FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, BIDEN ADMINISTRATION AND ANY AND MENTORING ADMINISTRATION CHANGE, THERE IS SOME THING THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN THAT WILL BRING A DIFFERENCE AND THERE WILL BE TENSION AND NEW PRIORITIES COMING IN.

WHILE WE KNEW THERE WOULD BE SOME CHANGES, NO ONE BELIEVED THAT IT WOULD COME SUCH BRITTLENESS OR SUCH IMPACT ON THE LEADERSHIP IN OUR COURTS AND STARTING WITHIN HOURS OF THE INAUGURATION AND TRICKLE DOWN.

>> WHAT ABOUT YOU?

DID YOU EVER GET AN EXPLANATION?

>> I'M A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

AS YOU NOTED ALMOST NINE YEARS IN, I WAS A NON-POLITICAL APPOINTEE AND I HAD EXCELLENT PERFORMANCE REVIEWS AND NO DISCIPLINARY ACTION.

I RECEIVED AN EMAIL WHILE ON VACATION.

THREE SENTENCES CITING ARTICLE TWO AND NOTING THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DECIDED TO TERMINATE ME AND EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.

NO CAUSE, EXPLANATION OR REASON.

>> DID YOU NOTICE ANY PATTERN TO THE JUDGES THAT WERE BEING DISMISSED?

YOU NEVER GOT ANY EXPLANATION OTHER THAN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL EXERCISING HER AUTHORITY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND PRESUMABLY THE OTHER JUDGES RECEIVED THE SAME NOTICE.

DID YOU NOTICE ANY PATTERN, WHETHER IT'S BEEN CONFIRMED OR NOT?

>> THERE HAVE BEEN PATTERNS MOST NOTABLY IN THE CLASS THAT WAS JULY 2023 DUE TO BEING RENEWED AND EXTENDED IN JULY 2025.

MOST OF THE INDIVIDUAL JUDGES WITH BACKGROUNDS IN PRIVATE PRACTICE ARE SEEMINGLY HAD NAMES THAT MIGHT INDICATE A DIFFERENT ETHNICITY OR HERITAGE AND DEFINITELY THE PROSECUTOR, SOME FORMER GOVERNMENT SERVICE AND THOSE ARE STILL WORKING.

OF THE 30+ JUDGES IN THE CLASS, I BELIEVE HALF OF THEM WERE DISMISSED AND NOT EXTENDED.

>> NEITHER OF YOU DISPUTE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THAT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THESE FIRINGS IF SHE SO CHOOSES.

GO AHEAD.

TELL ME.

>> I WILL DISPUTE THAT, BECAUSE I HAD A PERMANENT POSITION AND I WAS A NONPOLITICAL AND I HAVE RIGHTS AND CIVIL SERVICE REFORM I AM APPEALING MY TERMINATION AND I DO NOT FEEL THAT ARTICLE TO AUTHORITY IS VALID FOR MY DETERMINATION.

>> WHAT ABOUT YOU?

ARE YOU ALSO?

>> I WILL BE CONTESTING, BECAUSE THE TERMINATION AND FIRING WAS DONE FOR OUR JOB PERFORMANCE AND THERE CERTAINLY UNDERTONES WITH POLITICAL BIAS, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE.

THAT IS A VIOLATION OF OUR AGREEMENT UNDER OUR CONTRACT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

YOU DO NOT FIRE JUDGES BECAUSE OF A POLITICAL OPINION.

DON'T DO THAT AND THAT IS APPEALABLE.

>> WE ACTUALLY ASKED THE ADMINISTRATION ABOUT THIS AND ASKED DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR COMMENT ON BOTH DISMISSALS AND WHETHER THE ACTIONS REFLECT A BROADER SHIFT IN POLICY.

NONE HAS BEEN CITED.

THE APARTMENT DECLINED TO COMMENT, BUT IN OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES FOR EXAMPLE CAROLINE WHO IS NOW WHITE HOUSE SPOKESPERSON SAID LIBERAL ACTIVIST JUDGES ARE UNDERMINING POLICY AND NATIONAL SECURITY AND WENT ON TO ONE JUDGES RULING ON DEPORTATIONS TRULY DESPICABLE.

I'M WONDERING HOW YOU ARE HEARING THAT.

>> I WAS A NONPOLITICAL POINT TO JUDGE.

I SERVED AND WAS UNDER THE MISSION STATEMENT OF THE AGENCY AND FAIRLY UNIFORMLY ADJUDICATED THE CASES BEFORE ME AND I HAVE NO RECORD OF DISCIPLINE AND EXCELLENT PERFORMANCE REVIEWS AND I'M DOING A NONPARTISAN JOB AND I'M LOOKING AT THE CASE IN FRONT OF ME AND THE FACTS AND LAW.

I DIDN'T READ POLITICS INTO MY OFFICE AT ALL AND I DIDN'T BECAUSE THAT WASN'T MY JOB.

IT WAS TO ADJUDICATE THE CASES AND I DID THOUSANDS OF THOSE.

THOUSANDS.

>> WHAT ABOUT YOU?

ABOUT YOU?

>> CAME FROM PRACTICE THAT SOMEHOW I HAVE LIBERAL BIAS AND I DID PRO BONO WORK LOOKING FOR NONPROFITS AND THAT PRIOR WORK IS GOING TO MAKE ME LOWER -- MORE LIBERAL AND APPLYING FOR GRANT RELIEF.

WHAT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR THROUGHOUT THIS IS THAT SHE HAS NOT MENTIONED THE PRODUCTIVITY OR TARGETS WE MET AND THE EFFICIENCY WAS BROUGHT TO THE COURT.

NONE OF THAT WAS MEASURED.

IN THE PAST, THAT WAS MEASURED.

HOW WELL WAS THE JUDGE PERFORMING AND HOW IS THE TEMPERAMENT ON THE COURT?

HOW MANY CASES DID WE CLOSE?

HOW MANY MOTIONS DID WE ROLL- ON?

THESE ARE THE BREAD AND BUTTER PRODUCTIVITY ISSUES THAT WERE TYPICALLY REVIEWED BY OUR ASSISTANT CHIEF IMMIGRATION JUDGE AND ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN TOSSED AND THE ONLY THING DRIVING BASED UPON MY PERCEPTION OF WHAT'S DRIVING THESE TERMINATIONS IS AN IMPLIED POLITICAL BIAS.

THEY ARE MAKING IMPLIED POLITICAL BIAS AND ARBITRARILY A GREAT JOB.

>> DID YOU EVER GET INSTRUCTION FROM THE ADMINISTRATION THAT SUGGESTED TO YOU THAT IF YOU DID NOT RULE IN A CERTAIN WAY THAT YOUR JOB WOULD BE IN JEOPARDY?

GEORGE, DO YOU WANT TO START?

>> LET ME START WITH THAT, BECAUSE IT DID HAPPEN TO ME.

IT HAPPENED INDIRECTLY AND DIRECTLY PART DIRECTLY, I WAS TOLD THAT I SHOULD GRAB A MOTION TO DISMISS.

THIS IS ONE WE HAD I.C.E.

OFFICERS COMING INTO THE COURTHOUSE.

I WAS IN VERY VIGOROUS TERMS, PRESSURED TO GRANT MOTIONS.

IF YOU GRANT THAT MOTION, THEY RESPOND TO NO LONGER IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS.

AS SOON AS THEY LEAVE THE IMMIGRATION COURT, THEY WOULD HANDCUFF OR ARREST THEM AND PLACE THEM INTO EXPEDITED REMOVAL, THEN SHIP THEM TO GOD KNOWS WHERE.

SOUTH SUDAN, EL SALVADOR OR GULAGS IN RUSSIA.

THIS IS WHAT CHIEF WANTED ME DO.

TELLING ME HOW TO ROLL IN A SPECIFIC CASE AND IT WAS IN CONTRADICTION OF TRAINING THAT WE RECEIVED TO BE FAIR AND PROVIDE A FAIR HEARING AND PROMOTE DUE PROCESS.

IF YOU ARE TELLING ME HOW TO ROLL IN A CASE LIKE THIS THAT THE GERMANS, WHETHER A PERSON STAYS OR GOES, YOU ARE SERVING DUE PROCESS, SO THAT WAS A DIRECT INTERFERENCE WITH MY JUDICIAL NEUTRALITY.

INDIRECTLY, THERE WERE OTHER WAYS THAT THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION WAS PRESSURING US AND MORE RECENT MEMO OF JUNE 27 BASICALLY SAID, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, TO ALL THE JUDGES, WE ARE HERE TO PROMOTE FAIRNESS AND DUE PROCESS, BUT WE HAVE SEEN THAT APPLES THAT ARE BIASED.

WE DON'T LIKE THAT.

IF YOU ARE A BIASED JUDGE, YOU NEED A DIFFERENT CAREER OTHERWISE YOU ARE FIRED.

I AM PARAPHRASING.

THAT IS A MEMO AND THAT IS A SHOCKING MEMO.

THAT MEMO MASQUERADES.

MASQUERADES PROMOTING DUE PROCESS AND FAIRNESS.

WHAT IT IMPOSES IS A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF STRESS ON ALL JUDGES.

NOW, THEY HAVE TO SELF POLICE THEMSELVES.

AM I MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION?

AM I USING THE RIGHT WORDS?

THEY WOULDN'T BE SECOND- GUESSING, SO IT ADDS ANOTHER LEVEL OF TERROR AND INTIMIDATION ON JUDGES.

THAT IS WHAT I SAW.

>> JUDGE PEYTON, WHAT ABOUT YOU?

YOU GIVEN INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO RULE IN YOUR CASES?

WERE YOU GIVEN INSTRUCTION THAT YOU ARE EXPECTED TO PASS ON TO THE OTHER JUDGES THAT YOU SUPERVISED?

>> MY ROLE AS A SUPERVISOR, I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL ON THE 30th AND IN THAT EMAIL IT WAS GUIDANCE SAYING --THE EMAIL CONTAINED A LOT OF LANGUAGE, IMMIGRATION JUDGES MAY DISMISS CASE JUDGES AND ADJUDICATIONS ON THE RECORDS AND IT MAY, BUT WHEN I RECEIVED THAT EMAIL, WE HAD A MEETING BECAUSE MYSELF BELIEVED THAT IT MEANT SHOULD AND THAT WE SHOULD DISMISS AND SHOULDN'T WAIT 10 DAYS FOR A RESPONSE AND WE SHOULD IMMEDIATELY ASK ON THESE TWO DISMISS AND NOT REQUIRED 10 DAY RESPONSE FOR THE INDIVIDUALS TO REVIEW THAT AND PERHAPS THE COUNCIL AND TRY A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS.

>> IS THAT LEGAL?

>> THE LANGUAGE WAS CAREFUL AND COUCHED IN THIS MAY.

WHEN WE READ IT, WE ALL PERCEIVED AS IT SHOULD.

WHEN I TAUGHT JUDGES IN CLASS AND PART OF THE TRAINING CREW THAT TAUGHT HIM, WE EMPHASIZED EACH JUDGE AND TRAINING THAT YOU MAKE A DECISION ON THE FACTS IN FRONT OF YOU AND YOU INDEPENDENTLY REVIEW AND ADJUDICATE AND YOU DON'T TAKE THE PRESSURES AND SAID HER COURTROOM WHEN MAKING DECISIONS.

WHEN YOU RECEIVE THIS EMAIL AND EVERYTHING, WE HEARD HOW WE HAD COMPLETED AND TRAINED JUDGES.

ASK YOU.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE LISTENING TO THIS CONVERSATION.

THAT'S A SHAME, BUT WHY DO I CARE?

THERE ARE MORE OR LESS 3.5 MILLION CASES IN THE IMMIGRATION COURT.

OF THOSE CASES, MAYBE 2 MILLION WITH PENDING APPLICATIONS FOR ASYLUM OR OTHER RELIEF.

FILING, TERMINATING AND MAKING THEM QUICK OVER CLOSE TO 130 JUDGES SINCE JANUARY.

WE ARE NOW REDUCING THE JUDGES NUMBERS TO 600 AND SAYING THIS INCREASED EXPANSION WITH TWO HUGE NUMBERS IN THE ENFORCEMENT BUDGET AND NO SIMILAR INCREASE IN BUDGETS TO THE IMMIGRATION COURTS.

IT IS SHOWING THAT THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT JUSTICE.

THE IMMIGRATION JUDGES ARE ONES WHO HEAR THESE APPLICATIONS AND THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE WHETHER THE RESPONDENT HAS MET THE BURDEN TO ESTABLISH ELIGIBILITY FOR RELIEF.

BY FIRING THOSE JUDGES, INCLUDING THOSE THAT ARE AGAIN, NOT CAREER APPOINTEES, WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR OUR COUNTRY?

>> WHAT ABOUT YOU?

IF SOMEONE WERE TO SAY TO YOU, THAT'S TOO BAD AND THAT'S A SHAME, BUT WHY SHOULD I BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS?

WHAT WOULD YOU SAY?

>> THEY SHOULD BE CONCERNED.

WHEN YOU DISMANTLE DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS FOR IMMIGRANTS, YOU ARE ALSO ATTACKING DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS FOR U.S. CITIZENS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES.

THESE RAIDS CURRENTLY, YOU NOT ONLY HAVE NON-US CITIZENS BEING ARRESTED AND DEPORTED WITHOUT DUE PROCESS, BUT ALSO U.S. CITIZENS WHO HAVE BEEN ARRESTED WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE.

THAT IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. AS JENNIFER HAS RIGHTLY IDENTIFIED, WE HAD A HUGE INCREASE IN SUPPORTING ENFORCEMENT AND WE HAD DESTRUCTION AND ATTACK ON SYSTEM ON JUDGES, WHICH MEANS IF YOU HAVE NO JUSTICE AND YOU ONLY HAVE AN ESTIMATE, YOU NO LONGER HAVE DEMOCRACY, BUT AUTHORITARIAN STATE.

THAT IS WHY EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT JUST AN IMMIGRATION PROBLEM, BUT A CIVIL LIBERTY THREAT.

EVERYBODY SHOULD BE IN FEAR, BECAUSE CIVIL LIBERTY PROTECTIONS ARE UNDER ATTACK.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SPEAKING WITH US TODAY.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU,