The second Trump administration accelerated immigration removal through rapid, large-scale master calendar hearings—mega masters—creating a surge in deportation orders and many immigrants ordered deported in absentia without appearing in court.

USCIS estimates that up to one-third of the asylum backlog, about 444,000 of over 1.4 million cases, could be affected by the new rule, which takes effect immediately with a 60-day public comment period.

Advocates warn the rule risks deporting asylum seekers who followed legal processes, while critics argue it shifts cases to an immigration court under the Department of Justice, raising staffing and policy concerns.

In Chicago, a single judge presided over as many as 185 fast-tracked cases in one sitting, illustrating the extreme scale and speed of these hearings compared with typical dockets.

Fewer than 2% of June cases resulted in relief, and legal representation was limited (about one in five detained immigrants had a lawyer when deported in June).

The rapid scheduling and absence of appearances impose logistical burdens—time off work, travel, and housing costs—that hit low-income immigrants the hardest.

The policy increases referrals to immigration courts; in the first half of the current fiscal year, USCIS transferred 31,454 cases to immigration courts, already surpassing 2025 totals and nearing high-water marks from 2019.

Immigration judges nationwide issued over 100,000 removal orders in June, with absentia orders making up more than two-thirds, signaling a major due-process concern.

Experts say this trend reflects a deliberate shift to rapid deportations, raising significant due-process concerns and broader detentions and arrests.

The administration argues the change streamlines the process, reduces backlogs, and prioritizes timely adjudication of legitimate asylum claims, claiming the previous system invited delays and misuse.

An interim final rule lets asylum officers bypass mandatory interviews for certain applicants and refer them directly to immigration judges for removal, potentially expediting deportations.

Absentia removal orders often affected individuals not notified of rescheduled hearings or deterred from attending due to fear, resulting in deportations without a meaningful opportunity to present their case.