EOIR’s  primary mission is to adjudicate immigration cases by fairly, expeditiously,  and uniformly interpreting and administering federal immigration laws. There are 13 U.S. Immigration Courts’ Caseload Grew Due to an Increased Case Backlog, Posing Challenges to Stakeholders

		The Immigration Courts’ Caseload and Case Backlog Grew As Immigration Courts Completed Fewer Cases

Our analysis of EOIR’s annual immigration court system caseload—the  number of open cases before the court during a single fiscal year— showed that it grew 44 percent from fiscal years 2006 through 2015 due  to an increase in the case backlog, while case receipts remained steady  and the courts completed fewer cases. Our analysis showed that EOIR’s case backlog more than doubled from  fiscal years 2006 through 2015. Additionally, EOIR does not have efficient practices for hiring new  immigration judges, which has contributed to immigration judges being  staffed below authorized levels. Furthermore, as  previously discussed, about 39 percent of its immigration judges are  currently eligible for retirement according to EOIR officials. However, our analysis of EOIR hiring data found that from 2011 to August  2016, EOIR took an average of more than 2 years—742 days—to hire  new immigration judges. Using this and other information to assess its immigration judge  hiring process to identify opportunities for efficiency; using the  assessment results to develop a hiring strategy that targets short- and  long-term human capital needs; and implementing actions to increase  efficiency could better position EOIR to hire new judges more quickly and  address immigration judge staffing gaps, which could improve EOIR’s  overall operations. Assessing Case Continuance Data Could Help EOIR Ensure Efficient Management Practices

EOIR collects information on the extent and reasons why immigration  judges issue continuances—temporary adjournments of case  proceedings until a different day or time—but does not systematically  assess these data to identify and address potential operational  challenges affecting the immigration courts or areas where immigration  judges could benefit from additional guidance or training. Specifically, our analysis of EOIR’s continuance data  found that the use of all types of continuances increased by 23 percent  from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2015. Systematically analyzing the use of continuances, particularly operational  continuances, could provide EOIR officials with valuable information  about potential challenges the immigration courts may be experiencing or  areas that may merit additional guidance and training for immigration  judges. In its written comments, EOIR stated that it agrees with most of our 11  recommendations and has begun to address them. In  addition, EOIR did not specifically state whether or not it agrees with  individual recommendations. We agree with EOIR that this contract is a positive  step, but we continue to believe that EOIR would further benefit from  developing and implementing a strategic workforce plan that addresses,  among other areas, key principles of effective strategic workforce  planning. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report addresses (1) what Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Executive  Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) data indicate about its caseload,  including the backlog of cases, and potential contributing factors and  effects of the backlog according to stakeholders; (2) how EOIR manages  and oversees immigration court operations, including workforce planning,  hiring, and technology utilization; (3) the extent to which EOIR has  assessed immigration court performance, including analyzing relevant  information, such as data on case continuances; and (4) scenarios that  have been proposed for restructuring EOIR’s immigration court system  and the reasons that have been offered for or against these proposals.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Justice's EOIR is responsible for conducting immigration court proceedings, appellate reviews, and administrative hearings to fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly administer and interpret U.S. immigration laws.
GAO was asked to review EOIR's management of the immigration court system and options for improving EOIR's performance. This report addresses, among other things, (1) what EOIR data indicate about its caseload, including the backlog of cases; (2) how EOIR manages and oversees immigration court operations, including workforce planning and hiring; and (3) the extent to which EOIR has assessed immigration court performance, including case continuance data. GAO analyzed EOIR's case data from fiscal years 2006 through 2015—the most current data available—reviewed EOIR documentation, interviewed agency officials, and conducted visits to six immigration courts selected to include courts with relatively large and small case backlogs, among other things. GAO also interviewed experts and stakeholders selected based upon, among other things, their published work on the immigration court system.

What GAO Found

GAO's analysis showed that the Executive Office for Immigration Review's (EOIR) case backlog—cases pending from previous years that remain open at the start of a new fiscal year—more than doubled from fiscal years 2006 through 2015 (see figure) primarily due to declining cases completed per year.
EOIR has taken some steps to address its workforce needs, such as entering into a contract to determine judicial staff workloads, but does not have a workforce plan that would help EOIR better address staffing needs, such as those resulting from the 39 percent of its immigration judges who are currently eligible for retirement. EOIR also does not have efficient practices for hiring new immigration judges, which has contributed to immigration judges being staffed below authorized levels. GAO found that it took an average of 742 days to hire new judges from 2011 through August 2016. By assessing its hiring process and developing a hiring strategy that targets staffing needs, EOIR would be better positioned to hire judges more quickly and address its staffing gaps.
One example of EOIR's efforts to assess court operations is the extent and reasons why judges issue continuances—temporary case adjournments until a different day or time. EOIR collects continuance data, but does not systematically assess them. GAO's analysis of continuance records showed that that the use of continuances increased by 23 percent from fiscal years 2006 through 2015. Systematically analyzing the use of continuances could provide EOIR officials with valuable information about challenges the immigration courts may be experiencing, such as with operational issues like courtroom technology malfunctions, or areas that may merit additional guidance for immigration judges.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making 11 recommendations to, among other things, improve EOIR's workforce planning, hiring, and analysis of continuance data. EOIR stated that it agrees with most of the recommendations, but did not specify whether it agrees with individual recommendations. GAO continues to believe that all 11 recommendations remain valid as discussed further in this report.