People waited at the prompts and were taken to a downtown Chicago building, which was chaired by an immigration court in November 2024. Charles Rex Arbogast/AP Closed subtitles
Matthew O'Brien served in the Virginia Immigration Court when the first Trump administration ended.
He was fired at the end of the Biden administration's two-year probation. His firing – President Trump’s other judges in office have sparked Republican anger and political intervention claims.
The Trump administration has now brought O'Brien back and promoted to Assistant Immigration Judge.
This move has not been announced publicly. But it can be seen on the Justice Department website that oversees the Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) covering the Immigration Court system.
O'Brien has a history of public opinion and represents a hardline stance of immigration. As a judge, he also recorded records of the vast majority of people who refused to appear in court in the shelter.
His retraining raises questions about the neutrality of immigration judges who were supposed to be fair and whose decisions determine whether someone can stay or must leave the country.
"When you face an immigration judge, you should have confidence that people are trying to apply the law in a fair way and that person is thinking about your personal case, not thinking about some kind of political project," said David Hausman, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley.
NPR was unable to comment with O'Brien to comment on his re-recording as a judge and court record.
Eoir press secretary Kathryn Mattingly declines to comment Regarding the political motivation for bringing back O'Brien, it's pointing to his qualifications. She also said that all judges must decide matters impartially based on the law and the case.
Traditionally, immigration judges were not politically appointed and came from two main tracks, including people working for the Department of Homeland Security, prosecuting cases of the U.S. wishing to evacuate from the country.
The second track includes those lawyers representing immigration. However, there is no need for someone to consider practicing immigration law as the role.
Before becoming a judge, O'Brien worked for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service. He then got a job with the American Federation of Immigration Reform, a think tank that requires lower immigration and stricter border policies.
Like other civil servants, immigration judges cannot be fired due to political politics.
But after the Biden administration rejected him in 2022, O'Brien saw the decision as politically motivated and described it as "weaponization" of immigration.
Republicans in Congress in 2022 also questioned whether his firing and other judges violated the law, a coordinated effort between the Biden administration and immigration advocates to make a more friendly decision for immigrants seeking to stay in the U.S.
The inspector general of the Justice Department later studied the issue. It was concluded that there was not enough evidence to assure whether the Biden Justice Department had ever systematically favored or detrimental to immigration judge candidates.
However, since Trump returned to the White House, the Justice Department pointed out in a February memorandum that the Biden administration is justified in rejecting immigration judges and other judges, and that uncertainty is confident.
Immigration lawyers and other Trump critics believe the memorandum is the basis for bringing back what O'Brien and others in other administrations see as unfair dismissals, while removing people hired by Biden.
“In my opinion, if you don’t drag the party line, you might find yourself outside of the government, or at least send it to a less than ideal task,” said Paul Schmidt, a retired immigration judge, who worked in the immigration court system for two decades under the presidents of both sides.
Since returning to the White House, Trump has moved to federal employees who have conducted federal investigations against him, conducted extensive shootings throughout the agency and took steps to make it easier to fire other federal employees. He also dismissed other immigration judges and staff from immigration courts across the country, including in courts with vacancies.
"If the government can bypass professionals in decision-making, then that could have a huge impact on the number of people deported and the process these people receive in the first place," UC Berkeley said.
EOIR press secretary Mattingly said the Justice Department’s February memorandum aims to reestablish “a consistent and legal approach” about the matters of adjudicating personnel and said all judges must consider the law impartially and based on due process.
Andrew Arthur is another former immigration judge, former Republican Hill staffer and now a resident of the Center for Nonpartisan Immigration Research, which advocates lower legal immigration levels.
He also said he did not view O'Brien's releasing as politically motivated, as it could be possible compensation for his unfair shooting under Biden. He argued that all governments are trying to attract new judges who are aligned with the new attorney general’s policies.
It is unclear whether other judges President Joe Biden rejected were also brought back.
But the Trump administration has taken many other steps to change immigration court practices to evacuate people from the United States faster and reduce the backlog of millions of cases awaiting the court’s ruling.
Trump himself complained about the slow pace of the immigration court in the proceedings, saying on social media: "We can't give everyone a trial because it will be a 200-year spell."
The government is trying to speed up asylum cases conducted through immigration courts and even bypassing them by developing wartime forces and expanding accelerated downgrades. It also placed “self-replacement” ads in court waiting rooms.
O'Brien's return to Eoir proposes a potential further approach: bringing like-minded civil servants back to the bench that determines the fate of two immigrants and judges.
O'Brien will oversee the judges in Annandale Court, Virginia, as assistant immigration judges.
Such a position is also responsible for managing labor-management relations in the court, writing probation and training requirements, and ultimately providing advice to the Department of Justice on whether any new immigration judges are beyond their probationary period.
"This sends a clear message that the big brother is watching," said retired immigration judge Schmidt of O'Brien's position.
O'Brien has a history of public opinion, reflecting the Trump administration's harder immigration stance.
According to statistics from the transaction record Access Clearinghouse, his two years as an immigration judge during his two years as an immigration judge, those who refused asylum refused, most of whom came from El Salvador.
This is higher than the national average rejection rate and rejection rate for his specific courts, about 58% and 55% respectively.
“The people you are randomly assigned in immigration courts can really determine what happened to your case,” Law professor Housman said.
Judges have extensive decision cases, and some have clear decision patterns. For example, some people may grant asylum almost every time, while others may deny it almost every time. A variety of decisions depend on many factors, including the judge’s career background, the immigrant population near the court, and whether a potential immigrant has a lawyer (most immigrants don’t).
After leaving the bench, O'Brien served as Director of Investigation at the Organization Reform Law Institute, a legal organization defending stricter border policies.
In this position, he testified on various committees of Congress on issues related to immigration policy approaches and birthright citizenship.
"Diesel fuel is constantly pouring in this trash bin fire, a never-ending false assassination claim, and in front of them, it is totally unfounded," O'Brien said in a statement to the House Oversight Committee. Most asylum claims exaggerate the conditions in South and Central America in order to gain status in the United States," he said.
EOIR spokesman Mattingly defended O'Brien's qualifications and said all judges must comply with the law.
Responding to O'Brien's past comments, Mattingly said: "Immigration judges rule on a case-based basis for all matters, including asylum cases, under the ruling of U.S. immigration laws, regulations and precedents."
O'Brien's past statement of asylum became a central question in the Fourth Circuit argument last year on whether an asylum case should be filed.
The Justice Department argued that O'Brien's comments included "99% of (asylum) claims are baseless, not evidence of prejudice in immigration courts, but just an exaggeration.
The judge on the panel was skeptical - but ultimately no ruling on these claims.
Immigration advocates now say the Trump administration’s hiring and firing decisions could threaten the critical neutrality of the Executive Court.
"They are no longer neutral arbitrators," said Jennifer Whitlock, senior policy adviser at the National Center for Immigration Law, who fears immigration courts are expected to become "deport factories."
"They could also be in the same component as law enforcement or demolition operations, then," she said.