Overview of Trends in Immigration Court Non-Appearances
Immigration courts nationwide have observed an increase in the number of individuals failing to appear for mandatory hearings. This trend has led to a rise in "in absentia" removal orders, allowing the government to proceed with deportation in the absence of the individual.
Courtroom Observations
A typical scene in immigration courts involves judges addressing individuals about the requirement to attend hearings. For example, an immigrant from El Salvador was advised by a judge in Hyattsville, Md., to regularly check mail for notices after stating a previous notice was not received. On the same day, the judge noted multiple non-appearances. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) attorney subsequently filed motions for "in absentia" removal for five individuals, which were granted, making those individuals subject to deportation.
Statistical Data and Analysis
According to an analysis of court data by NPR and observations from immigration attorneys, the number of "in absentia" removals has been increasing annually since 2022. Fiscal year 2025 recorded over 50,000 such removal orders, nearly tripling the number from the previous year.
Data from the Executive Office for Immigration Review (part of the Department of Justice), covering January through November, indicates that the top 10 cities with the highest volume of completed immigration cases are projected to end the year with higher rates of "in absentia" removals compared to the beginning of the year. These courts experienced an uptick in such orders starting in the summer months.
Factors Attributed to Non-Appearances
Immigration lawyers and advocates have identified several factors contributing to the increase in non-appearances:
- Fear of Detention: Ruby Powers, an immigration lawyer, stated that information circulated among immigrant communities regarding potential arrests by ICE directly from federal or immigration courtrooms. Reports indicated that in 2025, ICE utilized courtroom arrests to meet arrest targets established by the Trump administration. New York courts, for instance, have been cited for incidents involving federal officers.
- Case Outcomes: Concerns about the likelihood of winning a case or the possibility of deportation to a third country are also cited as deterrents.
- Logistical Barriers: Issues such as not receiving court notices due to lost mail, changes in address not being updated with the court, inconsistent mail delivery in certain residences (e.g., apartment buildings), or notices being sent to incorrect addresses have been identified as practical impediments.
Legal Implications and Process
Andrew Arthur, a resident law and policy fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, noted that the Department of Homeland Security typically requires a removal order from an immigration judge before physically deporting an individual from the U.S. An increase in "in absentia" removal orders expands the number of individuals ICE can target for removal. Arthur stated that individuals who fail to appear effectively do not utilize their opportunity for due process.
Individuals subject to "in absentia" removal orders may have the opportunity to reopen their cases. However, most individuals in immigration court settings do not have legal representation, which is typically self-funded.
Broader Context
Organizations such as Mobile Pathways have tracked a low rate of arrests within courts, though advocates acknowledge that perceptions of fear can persist. Powers also commented that for some families, who may have fled violence or are dealing with trauma and language barriers, navigating the immigration system presents additional challenges. She added that while a rise in non-appearances is noted, most immigrants continue to attend their scheduled court appointments, suggesting that the increase is influenced by various stacked factors.