Former San Francisco immigration judge Chloe Dillon has sued the Trump administration, alleging that the Justice Department terminated her in retaliation after she raised concerns about ICE’s detention of an 18-year-old unaccompanied minor who had appeared in her courtroom. Dillon filed the case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, according to WWMT.
The complaint says Dillon objected after learning that ICE had detained the teenager following a hearing. She alleges that the child’s status and previously filed asylum application meant the government could not place him in expedited removal before that application was considered. Dillon says she reported potential statutory and due-process violations to a supervisor and was fired about 48 hours later, according to Bloomberg Law and WWMT. The article does not independently determine whether the detention or proposed removal process violated the law.
Claims raised in the case
Dillon alleges violations of the Whistleblower Protection Act, the First and Fifth Amendments, the Appointments Clause, and Article II of the Constitution. Her termination notice reportedly cited Article II as the basis for the action, while the complaint says she received no prior opportunity to challenge the decision, according to Bloomberg Law and ABC News.
The lawsuit also challenges a 2025 policy requiring immigration judges to grant ICE requests to move cases to different venues. Dillon says she warned that transfers could interfere with access to counsel and that a supervisor cautioned her that the White House was paying attention to the issue, according to ABC News. That allegation is separate from, but part of the same retaliation claim as, her objection to the detained teenager’s case.
A broader dispute over immigration judges
Dillon’s lawsuit follows a wave of immigration-judge dismissals. Bloomberg Law reported that more than 100 judges had been fired since January 2025, while other tallies cited by the article placed the number higher. Former judges Kyra Lilien and Carla Espinoza, along with other ousted judges, have filed separate cases alleging retaliation or discrimination, according to WWMT.
A Merit Systems Protection Board decision cited by WWMT found that the attorney general may remove immigration judges at will; that decision is under appeal. The dispute concerns judges employed by the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, which is part of the executive branch rather than the federal judiciary, according to WWMT.
Dillon’s legal career
Dillon served as an assistant federal public defender and trial attorney before joining the San Francisco immigration court in 2022. She later joined the management team of the San Mateo County Private Defender Program, where she continued working on immigration-defense matters, according to the San Mateo County Private Defender Program. San Francisco’s immigration court subsequently closed permanently, according to WWMT.
