The Justice Department has named Daren K. Margolin to head the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).
He is a retired Marine Corps colonel and career military lawyer.
This appointment puts him in charge of the nation’s immigration court system. Margolin’s selection aligns with the Trump administration’s strategy to accelerate removals as they seek to manage an unprecedented case backlog, according to The New York Times.
Margolin served for years as a Marine Corps attorney before joining the first Trump administration.
In June 2020, he was appointed Assistant Chief Immigration Judge and served in that role until 2024, as noted by The New York Times.
On paper, his résumé matches that of a leader seasoned in highly regulated, hierarchical environments.
A 2013 incident has received attention: while commanding Quantico’s Security Battalion in Virginia, Margolin discharged a personal firearm into the floor of his office.
Base rules prohibited Marines from carrying personal weapons, and as head of security, Margolin was responsible for enforcing that policy. Maj. Gen. Juan Ayala, who oversaw Marine installations, subsequently removed him from command, stating he had “lost confidence in his ability to command.”
Typically, such infractions result in disciplinary action ranging from formal reprimand to removal from command, as was the case here, suggesting it was handled within standard procedures for similar breaches of military protocol.
EOIR is not an Article III court; its judges are Justice Department employees who issue administrative decisions on asylum, removal, and deportation.
The EOIR director sets management policy, allocates resources, and effectively determines the pace at which cases move.
Unlike Article III court decisions, which are determined by independent judges and can set binding precedent, EOIR rulings are considered administrative and do not carry the same legal weight. For example, in a typical asylum case, an immigration judge at EOIR may determine the eligibility of an asylum seeker based on departmental guidelines, while the director’s policies may influence how quickly such cases are processed. This hierarchical structure highlights the distinct and powerful role the EOIR director plays in shaping outcomes in the U.S. immigration system.
The timing is notable: as of July 2025, the docket has reached nearly 3.8 million pending cases, according to The New York Times.
With approximately 500 immigration judges in the EOIR system, this equates to an average caseload of about 7,600 cases per judge each year. This staggering figure highlights the immense challenge faced by each judge in managing their docket efficiently. The administration has identified specific goals. The White House seeks to increase removals and argues that due process for every noncitizen without status can slow operations.
Upon returning to the White House, President Donald Trump replaced EOIR’s top leadership including the acting director and the chief immigration judge in an effort to assert more control, according to the paper. This move can be viewed in the context of historical patterns where different administrations have sought to influence the immigration court system. For instance, during the Obama administration, there was an effort to prioritize cases involving recent border crossers and those posing national security threats, which also led to shifts in immigration court policy. Similarly, under President George W. Bush, there were changes intended to expedite hearings and deter illegal immigration.
By comparing the actions of these administrations, it becomes evident that executive influence over the EOIR has been a consistent feature, though the intensity and focus of such interventions have varied.
This historical lens provides a clearer picture of whether the recent leadership shake-up is part of a continuity of partisan influence or signals a new escalation in efforts to control immigration outcomes.
EOIR functions as the adjudicatory arm of the U.S. immigration system. It hears asylum claims and other immigration matters.
Unlike other federal judges, who are nominated by the executive branch and confirmed by the Senate, immigration judges are appointed directly by the Department of Justice.
Their decisions are subject to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, and then, when appropriate, to the federal courts.
