A United States Army Reserve lawyer, detailed to serve as a federal immigration judge, has been dismissed from his post barely a month after starting, following a series of asylum rulings that ran counter to the Trump administration's stringent deportation objectives.
Rapid Dismissal After Asylum Grants
Christopher Day, a lieutenant colonel in the US Army Reserve's Judge Advocate General's Corps, began hearing cases at the immigration court in Annandale, Virginia, in late October 2025. His tenure was abruptly terminated around 2 December 2025, the National Association of Immigration Judges confirmed to the Associated Press.
While the US Justice Department declined to comment on personnel matters, federal data from November reveals a clear pattern. Of the 11 asylum cases Day concluded that month, he granted asylum or another form of relief allowing migrants to stay in the US in six instances. This 55% grant rate stood in stark contrast to the administration's drive to rapidly clear a backlog of 3.8 million asylum cases.
Military Lawyers and a Shift in Judicial Role
Day's firing occurred against the backdrop of a controversial policy shift. In September 2025, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth approved detailing up to 600 military lawyers to hear asylum cases. This move followed the administration's dismissal of nearly 100 judges perceived as too liberal and the easing of rules to allow attorneys from any background to apply to become 'Deportation Judges'.
Advocacy groups argue the initiative aims to transform the judge's role from an independent arbiter into a rubber stamp for deportation orders. The data from November appears to support this: military judges ordered removal 78% of the time, compared to 63% for all other judges. Nine in ten migrants appearing before these military judges were either ordered removed or asked to leave voluntarily.
Vulnerability Without Civil Service Protections
The case highlights the precarious position of military personnel in these roles. Unlike federal judges with lifetime tenure, immigration judges are employees of the Justice Department and can be fired by the Attorney General with few restraints. Military judges, however, lack even the standard civil service protections.
"It is hard to imagine someone being fired so quickly, after five weeks on the bench, unless it was for ideological reasons," said Dana Leigh Marks, a retired immigration judge and former head of the National Association of Immigration Judges. "It's especially unfair to military judges because they don't have the same civil service protections and could face severe consequences for failing in their assignment."
While military law forbids retaliation against lawyers for actions in a military tribunal, it is untested whether those protections apply in civilian immigration courts. Experts warn that even baseless personnel actions can derail a military career.
Christopher Day, a graduate of American University's law school with two decades of combined federal service and military duty, did not comment on his dismissal. His case raises profound questions about the independence of the immigration judiciary and the use of military personnel in a system designed for impartial adjudication.
