California Immigration Judge Sues DOJ Over Firing
A California immigration judge, who was dismissed during the Trump administration, is now taking legal action against the Department of Justice (DOJ). Kyla Lillian, the judge in question, alleges that her termination was motivated by her status as a registered Democrat and her connections to immigrant rights organizations.
In her 14-page complaint, Lillian names the DOJ and Acting U.S. Attorney Todd Blanche as defendants. She argues that her firing was influenced by various factors, including her being a woman over 40, her fluency in Spanish, and her active participation in the Hispanic community.
Kevin Owen, one of Lillian’s attorneys from Gilbert Employment Law in Maryland, stated that their legal team believes she didn’t conform to the administration’s expectations, describing the actions taken against her as both unacceptable and unlawful.
The lawsuit claims that Lillian’s dismissal infringed on her civil rights and her First Amendment rights. The complaint highlights a pattern, mentioning about 30 immigration judges nationwide who were either terminated or not transitioned from probationary status, particularly noting that most affected were women in immigrant court systems.
Lillian first began her duties at the San Francisco Immigration Court on July 23, 2023, and was later moved to the Concord Immigration Court in February 2024. She served nearly two years—a typical probationary duration before one might expect a permanent appointment based on DOJ policies.
The application listed many judges who experienced similar fates around the same time Lillian did, suggesting a significant trend of dismissals among women judges. Fox News Digital has attempted to reach Lillian’s attorney, the DOJ, and the Office of Immigration Review for comments.
Interestingly, Lillian reportedly excelled in her role, receiving satisfactory performance ratings during her probation. According to immigration statistics, she denied about 34% of the asylum claims presented to her.
On July 11, 2025, she was informed that her probation would not be made permanent and that the Attorney General would not extend her term as per constitutional provisions.
The complaint also points to a controversial memo from Sars Owen, the then-acting director of the EOIR, which expressed animosity towards immigrant advocacy organizations and certain hiring practices. This memo seemingly branded those groups as “far-left” and accused them of attempting to undermine the integrity of immigration courts.
Lillian’s lawsuit suggests that such messages reveal a broader bias against hiring individuals with backgrounds in immigrant rights, women, ethnic minorities, and others associated with diversity and inclusion initiatives.
