A United States Army Reserve lawyer, serving a temporary detail as a federal immigration judge, has been dismissed from his post barely a month after starting. The swift termination followed a pattern of rulings that granted asylum to migrants at a rate inconsistent with the Trump administration's stated mass deportation objectives.
A Sudden End to a Brief Tenure
Christopher Day, a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve's Judge Advocate General's Corps, began hearing cases at the immigration court in Annandale, Virginia, in late October 2025. According to the National Association of Immigration Judges, his employment was terminated around 2 December.
While the Justice Department declined to comment on personnel matters, federal data from November analysed by the non-profit Mobile Pathways reveals a telling pattern. Of the 11 asylum cases Day concluded that month, he granted asylum or another form of relief allowing the migrant to stay in the US six times.
"It is hard to imagine someone being fired so quickly, after five weeks on the bench, unless it was for ideological reasons," said Dana Leigh Marks, a retired immigration judge and former head of the National Association of Immigration Judges. She noted the particular vulnerability of military judges, who lack standard civil service protections.
The Broader Push for 'Deportation Judges'
Day's dismissal occurred within a sweeping administration effort to reduce a massive backlog of 3.8 million asylum cases. This drive has included the firing of nearly 100 judges perceived as too liberal and a relaxation of hiring rules.
Recent recruitment advertisements now refer to the position as "Deportation Judge," and the administration has broadened eligibility to include any attorney, irrespective of immigration law expertise. In response to this initiative, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authorised the detailing of up to 600 military lawyers to immigration courts in September.
Critics, including the American Immigration Lawyers Association, have compared the use of military officers without specialist knowledge to "cardiologists attempting to do a hip replacement." They argue the goal is to transform judges from independent arbiters into rubber stamps for deportation.
Military Judges and a Stark Trend
So far, about 30 military personnel have been assigned to immigration courts. For the most part, their rulings have aligned with administration expectations. Federal data from November shows that 90% of migrants whose cases were heard by these judges were either ordered removed or asked to self-deport.
Overall, military judges ordered removal 78% of the time, compared to a rate of 63% for all other immigration judges. Christopher Day's rulings, which bucked this trend, made his position precarious.
The legal protections for military lawyers in this unusual context are untested. Brenner Fissell, a law professor at Villanova University, explained that even baseless personnel actions like letters of reprimand can damage a service member's career. "The process can be the punishment," said Fissell, who helps run the Orders Project.
Unlike federal judges with lifetime tenure, immigration judges are employees of the Justice Department and can be fired by the Attorney General with few constraints. This reality was reportedly emphasised during a two-week training course for new judges in October.
