Illinois’ Democratic Congressional delegation is calling for the end of so-called “mega master” hearings that have packed immigration courts with chaos and led to record numbers of immigrants missing court and becoming targets for deportation. If you represent clients in or near Chicago’s Downtown immigration court, you need to understand how these oversized dockets are reshaping case strategy and outcomes.
What changed
New “mega master” hearings that began in Chicago in May are calling as many as 185 immigrants to a single small courtroom. This represents a dramatic departure from the prior practice. The usual groupings of 30 to 40 immigrants on a judge’s morning calendar ballooned upwards of 100.
Daily schedules with as many as 185 cases per judge, tiny courtrooms holding dozens more people than they were designed for, and drastically shrinking notice time for immigrants to appear before a judge — with or without a lawyer have created what practitioners and lawmakers describe as an unmanageable system.
The impact on no-show rates has been stark. In June, for the first time since 2019, more people were found to have missed court in Chicago than showed up, according to data released by the Executive Office of Immigration Review.
U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin and U.S. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi denounced the hearings as the “latest effort to weaponize the immigration courts to facilitate mass removals” at the expense of due process, in a five-page letter sent to Attorney General Todd Blanche on Tuesday.
Why it matters
For immigration attorneys and representatives, this shift has immediate practical consequences:
-
No-show risk: Many immigrants, fearful and unable to find a lawyer on short notice, are missing critical court dates. When clients don’t appear, judges can order them removed in absentia or in their absence. You must now build in extra confirmation steps and buffer time to mitigate the risk that a client simply cannot navigate the notice-to-hearing window.
-
Retained counsel becomes harder to place: The compressed notice period makes it increasingly difficult for unrepresented immigrants to find and retain an attorney before hearings. This directly affects your intake and scheduling process.
-
Due process arguments: Practitioners arguing appeals or habeas petitions may find precedent support in the lawmakers’ due process concerns and in the documented procedural irregularities (overcrowding, minimal notice, docket density that prevents meaningful review of individual cases).
-
Court-specific strategy: If your clients have hearings at Chicago’s Downtown court (55 E. Van Buren), you should expect mega hearings and plan accordingly—request continuances early, provide written motions rather than oral argument, and document any due process deficiencies for the record.
Way forward
-
Track Chicago docket assignments: When you receive a notice to appear for a client at Chicago’s Downtown immigration court, confirm in writing the exact date, time, and docket size. Request a continuance if notice time is under 2–3 weeks.
-
Document the conditions: If you appear at a mega hearing, take photos or field notes of courtroom capacity, case count per judge, and duration of hearings. This record-building helps support any future due process challenge or appeal.
-
Monitor Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) data: The data driving the lawmakers’ letter came from EOIR. Subscribe to or regularly check EOIR’s statistics page for updates on Chicago hearing patterns.
-
Reach out to advocacy groups and other practitioners: Law firms and nonprofits (like the Resurrection Project, cited in reporting) may be coordinating amicus briefs or legal challenges to the mega hearing practice. Sharing information with peers will strengthen collective advocacy.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Folaform is a software company, not a law firm. You should not rely on this article as your sole source of guidance; instead, consult a licensed immigration attorney and verify all information against the primary source linked above and current USCIS, DOS, DHS, and EOIR guidance. Immigration policy and court practice can change without notice.