Judge Chloe Dillon says she was fired roughly 48 hours after raising concerns that ICE arrested a teenage asylum seeker shortly after leaving her courtroom, where she had delayed efforts to place the teen into expedited removal. Dillon alleges she faced political pressure to comply with ICE transfer requests and that a supervisor warned the White House "was watching." Her lawsuit seeks reinstatement, back pay and damages, arguing her First and Fifth Amendment rights were violated. The DOJ called the claim "patently false" and defended its efforts to reform immigration courts.
SF Immigration Judge Says She Was Fired 48 Hours After Challenging ICE Over Teen’s Arrest
A San Francisco-based immigration judge alleges she was fired for questioning ICE tactics after the agency arrested a teen asylum seeker (Getty)
Judge Chloe Dillon, a federal immigration judge based in San Francisco, says she was terminated roughly 48 hours after raising concerns about an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrest of a teenage asylum seeker and resisting agency efforts to fast-track the teen's deportation, according to a lawsuit filed in federal court.
The complaint, filed Thursday, says Dillon emailed a superior after an August 2025 hearing to report that she had delayed ICE’s request to dismiss the teen’s case and move the person into expedited removal proceedings. Dillon wrote that she was alarmed when ICE arrested the teen shortly after they left her courtroom. Prior to the arrest, she had given the individual—who was representing themself—extra time to seek counsel.
"When you have judges who are in fear that they will be fired for the decisions that they're making, it has completely undermined the basic principles of judicial adjudication," Dillon told SFGate. "I don't see how you have fair and unbiased tribunals in the immigration court when there is this atmosphere of fear and intimidation."
In the complaint, Dillon asserts the asylum seeker was "almost certainly a designated unaccompanied minor" who could not properly be placed into expedited removal and was therefore entitled to have an already-filed asylum application reviewed first by an asylum officer and then, if necessary, by the Immigration Court.
Allegations of Political Pressure
The suit alleges the San Francisco immigration court had been under pressure to comply with ICE requests to transfer or fast-track cases. Dillon says a supervisor warned her in spring 2025 that the White House "was watching the issue and cautioned her against resisting the directive." She claims she refused to follow some transfer directives and pushed back when ICE lacked jurisdiction to re-calendar cases involving unaccompanied minors.
The complaint names the Department of Justice and Attorney General Todd Blanche among the defendants and asks the court to reinstate Dillon, award back pay and damages, and declare the termination unlawful. It contends Dillon’s First and Fifth Amendment rights and other federal protections were violated and alleges she was fired without notice or an opportunity to challenge the decision.
Response From Authorities And Wider Context
A DOJ spokesperson told The Independent the allegation is "patently false," and added: "After four years of the Biden Administration forcing Immigration Courts to implement a de facto amnesty for hundreds of thousands of aliens, this Department of Justice is restoring integrity to our immigration system and encourages talented legal professionals to join in our mission to protect national security and public safety."
The lawsuit comes amid broader changes at the San Francisco immigration court: over the past year and a half, most immigration judges there were dismissed and one of the court’s main facilities was closed. The complaint also highlights a rise in arrests by immigration authorities near courthouses, schools and other sensitive locations, with several people reporting arrests after routine check-ins that had previously proceeded without incident.
The Independent has contacted the White House for comment.
Help us improve.
