Immigration hearings in California are increasingly being conducted in large, fast-paced group sessions known as "mega master" hearings, a practice raising concerns among advocates and attorneys about due process and accessible justice. These hearings, held in overcrowded courtrooms such as those in Los Angeles and Van Nuys, require immigrants to appear in person or face automatic removal orders.

In late May, for instance, Maura, a Mexico native in her mid-50s who grew up in the United States, traveled nearly two hours from Bakersfield to attend her hearing at the Van Nuys immigration courthouse. Upon arrival, she found about 100 other immigrants crowded in the waiting area, many denied entry along with their families and legal support due to space constraints. The atmosphere was tense, with visible distress and uncertainty pervading the courtroom.

Observations from multiple hearings in downtown Los Angeles in June revealed that judges typically manage around five cases simultaneously, calling groups of immigrants forward en masse without addressing individuals directly. Proceedings often last hours, and many attendees leave without clear explanations of their case outcomes. Language barriers further complicate communication, as some immigrants rely on nonverbal cues with clerks due to limited English proficiency.

Legal experts contend that these expedited hearings disproportionately affect vulnerable asylum seekers, particularly those without legal representation or who entered the U.S. within the past five years. Lindsay Toczylowski, president of Immigrant Defenders Law Center, described the hearings as a targeted effort to issue removal orders swiftly, arguing that they prioritize mass deportation over delivering fair judicial outcomes. According to TRAC, a Syracuse University data group, California saw nearly 35,000 removal orders issued between January and May 2027, a figure approaching last year’s total of 43,852 under the previous administration.

The current approach reflects a strategic shift following the Trump administration's controversial mass roundups, focusing instead on detaining asylum seekers at routine immigration check-ins and fast-tracking their cases through the system. A spokesperson for the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) emphasized the need to address a nationwide backlog exceeding 3.2 million pending cases as of May 2027, with California alone accounting for approximately 340,000 open cases, including 95,000 in Los Angeles County. EOIR officials assert that the accelerated hearings aim to reduce delays that disadvantage both immigrants with legitimate claims and the broader public.

Department of Homeland Security representatives maintain that due process is provided to all immigrants facing removal and that options exist for detainees to seek voluntary departure, often accompanied by financial assistance and flights home. Meanwhile, Department of Justice officials have framed backlog reduction as a key priority, criticizing previous policies for failing to adequately manage unvetted migrant inflows and unaccompanied minors.

Compared to earlier group hearings, which sometimes involved scheduling around 20 individuals, current mega master hearings convene between 60 and 100 people in a single four-hour session, a volume that attorneys say hampers effective case management. Many participants attend their initial hearings without legal counsel, leaving them confused about proceedings and outcomes. Erin Moncure, a longtime court observer, noted that attendees frequently exit hearings feeling overwhelmed and uncertain about next steps.

Case selection criteria for these large hearings are not clear, but they seem to concentrate on recent asylum seekers, unaccompanied minors, and those lacking representation. Data show that nearly half of respondents in California deportation cases lack legal counsel, and nationally, more than 70% of removal orders issued in May affected unrepresented individuals.

Compounding difficulties, hearing dates are being rescheduled at short notice, complicating lawyers’ efforts to prepare comprehensive cases. Monia Ghacha, an L.A.-based immigration attorney, described the challenge of assembling documentation on tight timelines, especially for clients fleeing conflict zones.

Individual experiences highlight the challenges of the mega master process. Alberto, a Spanish-speaking applicant attending a green card hearing in west Los Angeles, found it difficult to understand the judge’s decisions conducted simultaneously with multiple other cases. His lawyer attended remotely, and translation quality was poor due to technical issues.

Others face even more precarious circumstances. One asylum seeker arrived late to her hearing after her lawyer mistakenly believed she could appear by video, nearly missing the chance to be heard and risking automatic removal. In a San Antonio mega master hearing, about 40 of 175 scheduled individuals failed to appear, according to attorney Jessica Smith Bobadilla. Similarly, a San Diego session ordered the deportation of nearly 50 individuals out of 80 scheduled.

For Maura, the May hearing ended with a postponement to a final hearing in February, but others attending the same day chose self-deportation or pleaded for additional time. The rapid pace and mass nature of the hearings continue to generate anxiety among immigrants, their families, and advocates who argue that the procedures undermine the fairness and transparency that the immigration system demands.