Since Jul. 17, Trump has fired 17 immigration court judges around the U.S.
According to a news release by the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), the union representing international court judges, 17 judges were fired “without cause”. The judges were from across ten different states, including Illinois, California Massachusetts, New York and Texas.
All 17 of these recently fired judges were women.
Judge Jennifer Peyton, Assistant Chief Immigration Judge of Chicago was fired via email over the 4th of July weekend earlier this month.
ABC 7 Eyewitness News reported that Peyton said her performance reviews have been consistently excellent and that she also received the Director’s Award from the Executive Office for Immigration Review.
The IFPTE union also stated that over 100 judges were either fired or resigned since the beginning of 2025 and the Trump Administration, leaving approximately 600 immigration court judges to serve over 3.5 million current immigration cases.
More information regarding this situation can be found online.
Check out our latest edition of Subscription Lawyer News: Chicago! – “U.S. Federal Government t is looking to imprison Michael McClain for up to six years”
¡Echa un vistazo a la última edición semanal de Subscription Lawyer News! – “Juez de Distrito de en Los Ángeles emite dos órdenes de restricción temporal contra el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE)”
Check out out latest edition of Subscription Lawyer News post of the week! – “U.S. District Judge in Los Angeles issues two temporary restraining orders against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)”
On July 9., 2025, The Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) released a decision in the case of Pascacio Gonzalez Jimenez.
According to the decision:
“ (1) Use of false or stolen Social Security numbers and providing false information on tax returns are negative considerations that weigh against a favorable exercise of discretion. (2) When a respondent seeks to excuse conduct by claiming to have relied on professional advice, the respondent should submit evidence of the specific advice given and explain why it was reasonable to rely on such advice.”
On December 19., 2024, an Immigration Judge found Jimenez ineligible for cancellation of removal and voluntary departure. The judge cited several factors including a DUI Jimenez had committed, the use of false and stolen Social Security numbers and filing false tax information to show that Jimenez did not demonstrate good moral character.
Jimenez appealed the December decision, claiming that his attorney gave him the false Social Security number, but the appeal was dismissed today, July 9., 2025. The BIA determined that Jimnez’s use of false Social Security numbers and tax information outweigh any possible positive equities he may have (such as his children being US citizens).
The BIA has now stated that using false or stolen Social Security numbers can weigh against someone seeking to cancel their removal. The BIA also emphasized that if someone claims a trusted professional provided or influenced their use of false or stolen Social Security numbers, that they must submit proof of what the trusted professional said and why they relied on it.
On June 25., Costa Rica’s Constitutional Court mandated the release of foreign migrants deported from the US. In February of 2025, roughly 200 migrants from Russia, Iran, China, India, Afghanistan and other Asian and African countries were deported from the US under the Trump Administration to a holding shelter called the Temporary Migrant Care Center (CATEM) in Costa Rica. Almost half of the deported people were children.
According to NBC News, the deported people at CATEM have been forced to share overcrowded sleeping areas with poor air conditioning. It has also reached over 90°F at CATEM, located in one of tropical Costa Rica’s southernmost parts.
Costa Rica’s courts decided that the detaining of the deported people was unconstitutional since they were not given proper counsel, information about their immigration status or information to request asylum.
The Guardian has stated that as of June 24., 28 deported people are still being held in CATEM, including 13 children. Others have either accepted repatriation, left CATEM alone or requested asylum in Costa Rica.
The Costa Rican government has been given half a month to assess each migrant’s immigration status individually and release them. The government has also been ordered to determine what forms of assistance the migrants may need, including education, housing, health care and other services to help them recover after being detained.
Additional updates from other sources on this ongoing situation can be expected.
On June 23., it was announced that Sean “Diddy” Combs will not testify in his ongoing criminal trial in Manhattan, New York. Combs, 55, was initially charged with one count of racketeering conspiracy, one count of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion and one count of transportation to engage in prostitution in September 2024.
In April 2025, prosecutors added two more charges: an additional charge of sex trafficking by force and another count of transportation for purposes of prostitution. Combs pleaded not guilty to all five charges. Combs has also been accused of physical and sexual violence towards women and others, bribery, arson, kidnapping, illegal drug distribution and other crimes.
Opening statements for the trial began on May 12. Since then, the prosecution has had 34 witnesses take the stand against Combs, each recounting their traumatic experiences with Combs and his alleged criminal enterprise. The prosecution has also presented a wide range of evidence, consisting of videos, photos, receipts, phone records, text messages and other forms of evidence to confirm the accusations against Combs.
John Heiderscheidt, Criminal, Immigration and Civil Law attorney of Subscription Lawyer shares his input on Comb’s decision to not testify:
“The question of whether to testify as a defendant at your own trial is often one of the most important decisions that you will have to face before the case proceeds to the jury. Each case is different and sometimes there can be a benefit to a defendant testifying. However, in my experience, unless there are close factual questions that can only be resolved for the jury through defendant testimony, often the risk is not worth the reward.
We saw this to be the case in a very popular criminal defense trial recently against former Speaker Madigan in Illinois. After the jury returned a guilty verdict, at the sentencing hearing, the judge specifically referenced Madigan’s testimony as an aggravating factor that led to a more extensive sentence than we saw in the Ed Burke case.
The lawyers representing Mr. Combs may feel that his testimony would not be helpful to the jury in resolving the limited factual questions before them, and they may not have wanted to risk a more harsh sentence in the event of a conviction on some or all charges,” said Heiderscheidt.
The trial is being presided over by United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, Arun Subramanian. He has stated that he hopes the trial will be concluded by July 4. Further updates on the case are expected as the trial continues.
CATEGORIES
Categories
ARCHIVES
Archives
ABOUT SUBSCRIPTION LAWYER
Subscription Lawyer is a Chicago-based law office, ready to go to work for you. We offer legal services to all interested clients.
You do not need a subscription to work with us.
However, a subscription can be a wise investment if you foresee spending time in court for immigration, criminal, or civil matters in the future.
"John was extremely knowledgeable, professional, and timely. I would highly recommend him to anyone seeking legal counsel, and he will be my first choice when seeking consult in the future." - Google Reviewer, 2025
"Very attentive and helpful reasonable prices, Thanks team" - Google Reviewer, 2025
"John was an absolute pleasure to work with, with an outstanding acuity and professionalism in his practice. I was very impressed with his ability in helping me understand the process and his overwhelming knowledge at every quandary!" - Google Reviewer, 2025
"John has been very helpful in guiding and helping me with understanding immigration, and knowing what is needed of me ... many do their job for money but you Mr. Heiderscheidt are doing it with empathy." - Google Reviewer, 2025
"They treated me professionally and with respect. I am very satisfied with the way my case was handled ... I recommend them 100%." - Google Reviewer, 2025
"Excellent lawyer" - Google Reviewer, 2025
"I highly recommend the advice and defense, they have been a great support in my asylum process and document management. Thank you very much for always being attentive!" - Google Reviewer, 2025
"I am very grateful for their excellent service, they work in a clean, correct and exact manner, I feel very safe working with them and I appreciate their kindness" - Google Reviewer, 2025
"John was thorough and very knowledgeable in the law. He was very attentive and prompt with any concerns & far exceeded my expectations. He was the perfect choice for my client’s issues." - Google Reviewer, 2024
"I'm grateful that I found your office online, you did the best you could for me and my mom!
Thank God for having You!" - Google Reviewer, 2024
