Judge Holly D’Andrea

No.

And I think the total number now, I think we're at 115 total judges now.

I think that the judges are fearful for their jobs.

So now, instead of looking at the policy and just looking at the law, they're weighing things very, very carefully because they're scared that if they accidentally favor the respondent a little bit in a case because the respondent provided more evidence or something, that they're going to get fired.

Or even so much as asking DHS to file a brief on something could maybe be considered as bias.

And

Every single day, there is kind of this like looming, you could be fired at any time, hanging over the judges.

Well, I mean, when you're looking at losing your job, that's no longer soft pressure.

That's a much stronger pressure on each of the judges because their livelihood is at risk based on how they decide the case that's sitting in front of them.

They've required certain judges to hear a certain amount of cases each day, which is, I mean, in theory, it sounds good.

But if you have a really complex asylum case, it's going to take a full four hours.

You know, and then you have another asylum case stacked right after that that's going to take another four hours.

That's your entire day.

And that's two cases.

So when you're saying that a judge has to hear five cases in a day, you're asking a judge to rush through a bunch of asylum cases without fully hearing the entire testimony or skirting through the evidence quickly.

It's very difficult.

In fact, I've talked to some judges who are working, you know, 14-hour days and on weekends to just be able to meet the minimum requirements to prepare for their cases.

And it's taking a real mental toll on them and even with their families.

Lunchtime.

Lunchtime or, you know, the 30 minutes before you go into the court.