Pentagon Authorizes 600 Military Lawyers to Serve as Temporary Immigration Judges in Trump’s Deportation Push

Washington, D.C. – September 4, 2025 – Just minutes ago, the U.S. Department of Defense announced that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has authorized up to 600 military lawyers to serve as temporary immigration judges, a move aimed at accelerating mass deportations under the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration policy. According to a memo dated August 27, 2025, reviewed by The Associated Press, the Pentagon will deploy groups of 150 attorneys—both military and civilian—to the Justice Department “as soon as practicable,” with the first cohort identified by next week. This unprecedented step comes as immigration courts grapple with a backlog of approximately 3.5 million cases, exacerbated by the administration’s intensified focus on deportations.

Context of the Decision

The deployment of military lawyers, primarily Judge Advocates General (JAGs), is part of a broader strategy to address the overwhelmed immigration court system, which has seen its caseload balloon in recent years. The Justice Department, which oversees the courts, requested assistance from the Defense Department to bolster judicial capacity amid a surge in arrests and deportations. The Trump administration has prioritized cracking down on illegal immigration, deploying troops to patrol the U.S.-Mexico border, sending National Guard members to support enforcement in U.S. cities, housing migrants awaiting deportation on military bases, and using military aircraft for deportations.

The memo specifies that the military lawyers’ duties as immigration judges will last no more than 179 days initially but can be renewed. The move effectively doubles the current number of immigration judges, which stands at roughly 600 after recent terminations and voluntary resignations. The International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, the union representing immigration judges, reported in July 2025 that at least 17 judges were fired “without cause” across 10 states, while over 100 others have left voluntarily since January 2025, citing pressure from the administration.

Rationale and Implementation

The decision to use military lawyers stems from a Justice Department request to address the backlog, which often delays case resolutions by years. A White House official, speaking anonymously, described the backlog as “a priority that everyone—including those waiting for adjudication—can rally around.” The administration is also exploring other options, such as hiring additional immigration judges, but the immediate deployment of JAGs reflects the urgency of its deportation agenda.

The first group of 150 attorneys is expected to begin training within weeks, with some already receiving volunteer call-emails, according to NPR. The training, described as a two-week crash course, has raised concerns among immigration law experts. The head of the American Immigration Lawyers Association likened the use of minimally trained military lawyers to “having a cardiologist do a hip replacement,” arguing that immigration law’s complexity requires specialized expertise. Critics, including former Chicago supervising judge Jennifer Peyton, doubt that JAGs can master the field without the standard weeks-long training and two-year probationary period typically required.

Criticisms and Concerns

The move has drawn sharp criticism from immigration advocates and legal experts. The union representing immigration judges warned that deploying JAGs with limited experience could lead to slower decisions and increased appeals, potentially worsening the backlog. An organization for immigration lawyers called the directive “destructive,” accusing the administration of undermining the courts’ integrity. Posts on X reflect similar skepticism, with users questioning the qualifications of military lawyers and suggesting the move prioritizes speed over fairness.

The administration’s broader immigration strategy has also sparked debate. Since January 2025, the Trump administration has fired or pressured numerous immigration judges to resign, reducing the court’s capacity even as it ramps up enforcement. The use of military resources—troops, bases, and aircraft—has raised concerns about militarizing immigration policy, with critics arguing it risks violating due process for migrants. The deployment of JAGs further blurs the line between military and civilian functions, prompting questions about the impact on the armed forces’ justice system, where these attorneys typically handle prosecutions, defense, and legal advising.

Political and International Implications

The decision aligns with President Trump’s campaign promises to expedite deportations, a cornerstone of his 2024 platform. Recent actions, such as ending Secret Service protection for former Vice President Kamala Harris and targeting alleged narco-terrorists, underscore the administration’s hardline stance on security and immigration. However, the move has strained relations with countries like Mexico, where officials have criticized U.S. unilateral actions. Mexican Foreign Minister Juan Ramon de la Fuente stated on September 3, 2025, that such policies could “complicate bilateral cooperation,” particularly on migration and border security.

Public sentiment, as seen on X, is deeply divided. Supporters applaud the administration for addressing the backlog and prioritizing deportations, with one user writing, “Finally, action to secure our borders and clear the courts!” Others express alarm, citing the risk of rushed, unfair rulings and the precedent of using military personnel in civilian judicial roles.

Looking Ahead

As the first group of military lawyers prepares to assume their roles, the administration faces the challenge of balancing speed with judicial integrity. The temporary nature of the assignments—capped at 179 days with potential renewals—raises questions about long-term solutions to the backlog. The Justice Department’s decision to lower requirements for temporary immigration judges, allowing attorneys with minimal immigration law experience to serve, has further fueled concerns about the quality of adjudications.

The deployment of 600 military lawyers marks a bold escalation in the Trump administration’s immigration agenda, but its success will depend on the training and performance of these temporary judges. As the backlog persists and deportations intensify, the move will likely remain a flashpoint in debates over immigration policy, judicial independence, and the role of the military in domestic affairs. For now, the nation watches as this unprecedented experiment unfolds, with significant implications for migrants, the courts, and U.S. policy.