The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) under President Donald Trump has quietly dismissed Vivienne Gordon-Uruakpa, a New York-based immigration judge known for her high approval rate of asylum claims.
Gordon-Uruakpa, a Black female jurist married to a Nigerian-American, was terminated without public announcement in September, according to the New York Post. Widely regarded as New York’s most lenient immigration court judge, she had an impressive approval rate of 97 percent for asylum seekers, the highest among her colleagues in the state.
Her removal has raised concerns about transparency, especially as she has since disappeared from the official website of the downtown Manhattan immigration courthouse where she previously served. When approached for comment, the DOJ declined to provide any details regarding her dismissal, merely stating that the court’s website “is up to date.”
Observers suggest that Gordon-Uruakpa’s sudden exit is part of a broader purge of immigration judges perceived as sympathetic to asylum applicants. Immigration court judges, operating under the Justice Department, do not enjoy the same lifetime tenure or civil-service protections as federal judges, rendering them vulnerable to political dismissal.
Attorney General Pam Bondi holds the authority to appoint and remove immigration judges, a power that critics argue has been increasingly used to shift immigration courts toward stricter enforcement policies. This development follows reports that the Trump administration has dismissed over 100 immigration judges during its tenure, coinciding with rising deportation rates and intensified border enforcement.
Data from Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) reveals that nearly 80 percent of migrants seeking asylum were deported in the last quarter alone.
Gordon-Uruakpa, 66, studied at Fordham University in the Bronx and later attended Howard University School of Law. Her extensive experience in legal aid and criminal defense is believed to have shaped her approach to asylum adjudication.
Her removal has drawn renewed attention to the arbitrary nature of asylum outcomes, as highlighted in a recent report indicating that the fate of an asylum seeker often hinges on the specific judge assigned to their case, effectively turning immigration proceedings into a “judicial lottery.”
In contrast, John Burns, known as one of New York’s toughest judges on asylum claims, was appointed Acting Assistant Chief Judge in January, signalling a shift toward stricter immigration rulings.
The Justice Department’s refusal to disclose the reasons behind Gordon-Uruakpa’s termination has further fueled concerns about political interference in immigration courts and the independence of judges handling asylum cases, a stark departure from practices under previous U.S. administrations, which seldom removed judges based on their asylum approval records.
Leave a Reply