Chloe Dillon, formerly an immigration judge in San Francisco, has initiated a federal lawsuit claiming her dismissal by the Department of Justice (DOJ) followed her criticism of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) tactics. Dillon is among 14 judges removed from their positions since President Donald Trump’s return to office in January 2025, when his administration began enforcing strict immigration policies, which were central to his 2024 campaign.
In an email to Newsweek, Dillon stated: “It is important for people to know that the immigration courts no longer exist as an unbiased forum. This issue affects everyone—if not personally, someone in their community is undoubtedly impacted by immigration.” Her lawsuit names Attorney General Todd Blanche, the DOJ, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review, a DOJ sub-agency, along with its acting director, Sirce Owen.
The DOJ dismissed the allegations as “patently false,” with a spokesperson indicating that the agency typically refrains from commenting on pending litigation. They also affirmed their intent to restore integrity to the immigration system, countering claims of amnesty during the previous administration.
Dillon claims her termination violated her constitutional due process and First Amendment rights and occurred after she raised concerns over alleged unlawful ICE actions and directives impacting court proceedings. In particular, Dillon highlighted a situation where she alerted her supervisor on August 20 about ICE agents allegedly detaining an unaccompanied minor unlawfully. Despite this, she faced termination without cause two days later.
Her filing asserts she was deprived of notice or a hearing, and alleges her political views influenced the dismissal. Appointed by the Biden administration, Dillon served from September 2022 to August 2025, following nearly a decade as a federal public defender in San Diego. The lawsuit further mentions an order in April 2025 from the San Francisco assistant chief immigration judge, telling judges to grant ICE motions to shift cases routinely. Dillon resisted, later receiving caution from her supervisor about attention from “the White House.”
She expressed: “First, the idea that ICE motions to change venue should always be granted is contrary to law and offends due process. Second, ICE arrests at courthouses—particularly of an unaccompanied minor who had rights under a DOJ settlement agreement—endanger everyone and disrupt the orderly conduct of the court.”
Earlier this month, the San Francisco immigration court officially shut down following numerous firings and retirements.
Concerns About ICE Operations
Recent polls indicate that Trump is losing support on immigration policy, historically one of his stronger issues. An August survey by Reuters/Ipsos showed 40% of registered voters favoring Republicans for immigration policy compared to 38% supporting Democrats—reflecting the lowest gap during Trump’s second term.
Since Trump’s current term commenced, ICE controversies have arisen, including the fatal shootings of U.S. citizens in Minneapolis during the Metro Surge operation. Additionally, there has been scrutiny over ICE’s use of deadly force and custodial deaths, with 30 deaths reported in 2025, marking the highest count since 2004.
The detention of minors has brought further concern, with The Guardian reporting ICE detained around 3,800 minors from January to October 2025. Some were as young as one year old.
What Happens Next
Dillon is seeking reinstatement as an immigration judge, alongside back pay, lost benefits, and compensatory damages. “The government will have about 60 days to respond to the lawsuit,” Dillon told Newsweek. “Once we get past any motion they file, we’ll be able to take discovery. We look forward to that process.”
Newsweek editors John Fitzpatrick and Dave Siminoff have been contacted for comment.