Bearing Witness in Immigration Court: the Importance of Showing Up in Solidarity
Bearing Witness in Immigration Court: the Importance of Showing Up in Solidarity
By: Stephanie Euber, Membership & Capacity Building Associate
Today we are sharing an article written by Stephanie Euber, our Membership & Capacity Building Associate! Stephanie has been studying how Court Observation Programs impact the Immigration Courts in terms of their results as well as how it helps shape providers ability to navigate the court system. Stephanie looks at the research of Professor Lenni Benson, and Immigrant ARC's Court Observation programs to then provide analysis of the results and what lessons can be taken from these results both here in NY and across the country.
History & Background
Court observation, or courtwatching, traces its origins to the English concept of the public trial and the encouragement of societal participation to act as a mechanism to keep those in power, and their institutions, in check. Courtwatching, in a formal sense, developed in the 1970s thanks to advocates trying to monitor reform and ensure accountability in criminal court, in family court, and with high-profile cases (Gill, Nick and Joe Hynes 2021).
Because immigration court proceedings are civil, not criminal, respondents in court do not have the constitutional right to an attorney. This highlights one of the more critical reasons legal practitioners and advocates began calling for court observation within the immigration court context. Over the past decade, academics and researchers have continued to raise the alarm to bring observation practices to immigration courts, developing studies on the impact of observation on judges’ behavior and the trajectories of the cases they hear.
Professor Benson’s Research
Professor Lenni B. Benson Distinguished Chaired Professor of Immigration and Human Rights Law at New York Law School
Professor Lenni B. Benson, Distinguished Chaired Professor of Immigration and Human Rights Law at New York Law School, founded the Safe Passage Project to recruit and train attorneys to represent unaccompanied youth facing deportation. Professor Benson is a longtime friend of Immigrant ARC (I-ARC), having previously worked as Senior Fellow on a project for Afghan immigrants. Professor Benson continues to be an active member of I-ARC, providing training sessions and participating in roundtable discussions. For the past several years, I-ARC has co-sponsored the New York Law School Annual Asylum Conference that Professor Benson chairs (2026 Conference Example).
In 2025, Professor Benson et al. published the findings of a study on the effects of judicial observation on judges’ behavior and case outcomes. Benson et al. found that “judicial observation significantly increases the likelihood that judges adjourn initial hearings to give respondents time to secure counsel, and subsequently increases the probability that respondents are represented by an attorney in later hearings” (Benson et al. 2025: 1). According to this research, “an observer’s presence in the first hearing of a case without an attorney leads to a 19% increase in the likelihood that a judge will adjourn to allow the respondent time to hire an attorney relative to non-observed hearings” (3). Further, having an observer present increases the likelihood that the respondent will secure an attorney later in the proceeding by nearly 14%.
Professor Benson et al. found that there are “statistically significant observer effects for the Latin American countries,” which make up the majority of respondent nationalities in the New York immigration courts (21). Another interesting finding is that the observer effect increases even more when the judges know that the court administration is aware that observation is taking place (22). This indicates that the judge’s behavioral response to being observed can partially be explained by “hierarchical motives/considerations” (23). Overall, the research is consistent with the “immigration roulette” pattern well-documented within the wider immigration legal literature, meaning that the trajectory and outcome of a respondent’s case greatly depends on the specific judge the case is randomly assigned to.
Ultimately, Benson et al. found that court observation can be used strategically as a tool to improve fairness within the immigration court system. In their study, observation led to a tangible increase in attorney representation after the first hearing, contributing to improved procedural fairness and transparency (24). Considering both the current political environment that is exceptionally hostile towards immigrants and the always growing, insurmountable backlog of cases, seeking refuge in the United States is precarious, at best. For immigrants, every moment spent on American soil is filled with a looming fear of being detained and discarded by masked men with guns, without even being heard by a judge. Immigrants seeking safety, justice, and fair treatment find themselves imprisoned in a pressure cooker and, for them, the ominous ticking of the clock has never been louder.
Lessons from I-ARC’s Court Observation Project
Watching/Observation/Eyes Graphic from Google
Since launching our Court Observation Project in summer of 2025, we have trained hundreds of volunteers in court observation practices. Our volunteers have observed thousands of hearings across the four immigration court rooms in New York State. Since launching the project, the data gathered by our volunteers has been utilized in several litigation efforts. These efforts mostly involved supporting lawsuits challenging ICE courthouse arrests and the expansion of expedited removal. I-ARC’s most recent efforts included supporting litigation challenging policy changes on WebEx availability for virtual hearings.*
The data gathered by volunteers has illuminated several trends of interest, including: loss of immigration judges, barriers to accessing court rooms via WebEx, an increase in the use of pretermission, and the rapidly shifting usage of Asylum Cooperative Agreements (“ACAs”). Over the course of several months, observers noted that a total of 20 immigration judges out of the 81 total judges in New York immigration courts had been fired, resigned, removed, or otherwise left their roles. In March 2026, the data revealed a sharp increase in the number of applications being pretermitted. Pretermission is a tactic being used to reduce the backlog of asylum applications in which an immigration judge can dismiss a respondent’s case without a full hearing if the judge determines the application is incomplete or does not meet basic legal requirements. Pretermission is a method used to fast-track ordering more people removed from the country.
I-ARC provides observation data updates to members during Member calls and shares pretermission updates via a Weekly Recap. By working with a small data-sharing group between November and March, I-ARC created and refined a trend tracker workbook. I-ARC then collaborated with South Brooklyn Sanctuary to include a spreadsheet page with updated court clerk information as that was becoming more difficult to come by. I-ARC provides members with trend updates periodically to help keep them informed. Most recently, I-ARC used volunteer feedback to enhance the Court Observation Project, implementing a method to communicate ongoing updates to volunteers about the real-life impact their observations are having within the field.
Shared Experiences of Court Observers Across the Country
Courtroom Graphic from Google
For decades, court observation has led to improvements in courtroom processes and increased accountability and transparency. For example, a Massachusetts-based court watching program supported a major change in the state’s judge appointment process in 1973 (Matei 2024). Findings from the court watching program mobilized advocates to call for increased accountability and transparency in judicial selection across the state. Thus, court watch became the catalyst that would lead to Governor Michael S. Dukakis’ establishment of the Judicial Nominating Commission in 1975. This commission was designed as a mechanism to screen potential judicial candidates and ensure nonpartisan elections. More recently, in 2024, staff at the Illinois Alliance for Reentry and Justice provided training to residents of Cook County. They then gathered hundreds of observation data points “to create a scorecard for each judge up for reelection.” Today, court observation projects are popping up all around the country as more and more people recognize the value of having volunteers peer into the “black box” that is immigration court proceedings.
Court observation is not for the faint of heart as it harshly brings to light the deficiencies of the American legal system and how we manage immigration as a whole. Tim Murphy, a New York City-based journalist, shared insights from his experience as a court observer at 26 Federal Plaza. He stated the uncomfortable reality that many observers come to realize:
You’re witnessing unspeakable cruelty, but you can’t lash out. You have to remember that you are there strictly as a friend of immigrant community members on what may be one of the scariest days of their lives. You’re also there to alert the outside world to what’s happened to them (Murphy 2025).
In his reflections, Murphy notes that his natural urge is to use anger to fight hard for justice, but this tactic isn’t appropriate for immigration court. Instead, Murphy explains:
So what’s left is an act of love — the quiet, frustrated love of sitting or standing by someone’s side through a process that will culminate in either a bit more freedom or the abrupt end of their American dream. The comfort of talking to them in their own language, or a gentle hand on their back or a squeeze of their shoulder. The profoundly good feeling of walking them to the train, knowing they’re going home, at least for a while, to their family or friends. The rightness of centering the vulnerable over the villains.
Bearing witness affects court observers themselves just as much as it impacts judges’ behavior. “Immigration court observers reported that while human rights monitoring can be emotionally
challenging, it can also challenge their notions of the U.S. immigration system and the portrayal
of the issue in the media” (The Advocates for Human Rights 2020: 3). Vicarious trauma, secondary trauma, and compassion fatigue/burnout are real threats to those in the helping professions. Immigrants come from various nations and backgrounds with complex trauma histories. Being so deeply immersed in the work, legal services providers must actually build self care mechanisms into their work week to maintain personal wellbeing. Thus, advocates and volunteers can also experience vicarious trauma and burnout and should prioritize checking in with themselves regularly.
Being exposed to the realities of immigration court also helps flesh out an individual’s understanding of the immigration system as a whole and its effects on society. Participation in immigration court observation projects is a tangible way average individuals can contribute to the mission of enhancing justice and guarding against human rights abuses. It is up to all Americans, not just government actors or Congress, to “redesign immigration laws [to be] consistent with human rights standards” (4).
Gramling, a writer, teacher, and observer in New York City, shared anecdotes from her experiences conducting observation. She stated, “Every respondent I have accompanied is afraid, and I can’t, in good faith, tell anyone who reports to the 12th floor as an ‘alien’ that their fear is misplaced” (Gramling 2026). Observers may also find themselves afraid and it is worth stating that their fear is not misplaced either. Fear, shock, regret, and shame are normal emotions to feel during traumatic experiences and observers are not immune just because they are there to watch rather than to interact or interfere. Gramling wrote about witnessing a man who thought his hearing went very well only to be swept away by ICE agents upon exiting the hallway and about how helpless she felt in that moment, knowing the man’s family would have no idea where he went. She stated:
I could have said, ‘I’ll call your wife,’ or ‘I will find you help,’ but I did not. Three days before, an ICE agent had shot Renee Good in the head through her car window. I was afraid. The ICE agent barked at me to clear the hallway, and I did what I was told.
Immigration court observation faces ongoing threats as barriers to observation arise across the nation. This year, various legal observation groups in Minnesota and New York “sued the U.S. Department of Justice and senior federal immigration officials, alleging that their volunteers are being physically shut out of courtrooms as well as digitally” (Kubzansky 2026). Despite barriers to access to justice, the United States government’s efforts to create and maintain a culture of fear, and the hostility between warring political parties that does little at the end of the day to stand up for justice, observers will continue showing up for neighbors who deserve to have their humanity recognized and respected. Projects like I-ARC’s Court Observation Project will persist because those of us with the privilege of seeing have a duty to say something. One does not have to explicitly make a living as an advocate, activist, politician, researcher, or academic to make a difference. The average American citizen has more power than we know, so together, we truly can change things for the better.
*See pending litigation: African Communities Together v. Todd M. Lyons, No. 25-cv-06366, (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2025), https://www.nyclu.org/uploads/2025/08/2025-08-11-Memorandum-Of-Law-dckt-23_0.pdf.; Immigrant Advocates Response Collaborative v. United States Department of Justice, No. 25-cv-2279, (United States District Court for the District of Columbia July 16, 2025), https://immigrantjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/IARCvDOJ-Complaint_07-16-2025_filestamped.pdf.; The Advocates for Human Rights v. Bondi et al., No. 1:26-cv-00865, United States District Court for the District of Columbia March 12, 2026), https://training.theadvocatesforhumanrights.org/res/byid/14817.
Works Cited:
African Communities Together v. Todd M. Lyons, No. 25-cv-06366, (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2025), https://www.nyclu.org/uploads/2025/08/2025-08-11-Memorandum-Of-Law-dckt-23_0.pdf.
American Immigration Lawyers Association. “Running on Empty.” Professional Resources, AILA, Aug. 28, 2018, https://www.aila.org/library/overcoming-secondary-trauma-immigration-practice.
Benson, Lenni B. et al. “Legal Representation in Immigration Courts: The Impact of Randomly Assigned Observers.” July 27, 2025, https://wwws.law.northwestern.edu/research-faculty/events/colloquium/law-economics/documents/immigration-project-model.pdf.
Dholakia, Nazish. “How to Be a Court Watcher (and Why You Should).” News and Stories, Vera Institute of Justice, May 29, 2025, https://www.vera.org/news/how-to-be-a-court-watcher-and-why-you-should.
Gill, Nick, and Jo Hynes. “Courtwatching: Visibility, Publicness, Witnessing, and Embodiment in Legal Activism.” Area (Oxford, England), U.S. National Library of Medicine, Dec. 2021, pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9291987/#:~:text=Some%20of%20the%20largest%20and,courts%20is%20therefore%20particularly%20common. Gramling, Amelia Christmas. “Bearing Witness in Immigration Court: Dispatches from a Federal Courthouse in New York City.” The Monday Essay, The Dispatch, March 16, 2026 https://thedispatch.com/article/immigration-court-bearing-witness-ice/#:~:text=The%20seeker%20must%20provide%20credible%20evidence%20that,her%2C%20or%20she%20must%20prove%20that%20her.
Immigrant Advocates Response Collaborative v. United States Department of Justice, No. 25-cv-2279, (United States District Court for the District of Columbia July 16, 2025), https://immigrantjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/IARCvDOJ-Complaint_07-16-2025_filestamped.pdf.
Kline, Deb, et al. “Bearing Witness: A Report of the Cleveland Immigration Court Monitoring Project.” Cleveland Jobs with Justice, No Date, www.congress.gov/117/meeting/house/114339/documents/HHRG-117-JU01-20220120-SD016.pdf.
Kubzansky, Caroline. “Immigration Court Observers — and Their Oversight — Routinely Locked Out of Process.” Immigration, Chicago Tribune, Mar. 30, 2026, https://www.chicagotribune.com/2026/03/30/immigration-court-observers/?share=utebrsauwinhbmarwinr.
Matei, Andreea. “What You Need to Know to Start a Court Watch Program.” Catalyst Grant Program Insights, Urban Institute, October 10, 2024, https://www.urban.org/catalyst-grant-program-insights/what-you-need-know-start-court-watch-program.
Murphy, Tim. “The Heartbreak, Rage - and Discipline - of Immigration Court Watching.” Life Inside, the Marshall Project, August 22, 2025, https://www.themarshallproject.org/2025/08/22/court-watch-ice-masked-immigration-agents.
The Advocates for Human Rights. “Bearing Witness in the Moment: Report from the Immigration Court Observation Project.” The Advocates for Human Rights, 2020, https://www.theadvocatesforhumanrights.org/Res/bearing_witness_2020%202.pdf#:~:text=This%20report%20details%20the%20experiences%20of%20the,who%20are%20bearing%20witness%20to%20those%20proceedings.
The Advocates for Human Rights v. Bondi et al., No. 1:26-cv-00865, United States District Court for the District of Columbia March 12, 2026), https://training.theadvocatesforhumanrights.org/res/byid/14817.
Waldhauser, Carol P. “IN RE: When You Are Affected By Your Cases.” No Date. http://www.de-lap.org/pdfs/WhenYouAreAffectedbyYourCases.pdf.
Williams, Jumaane D. “We Can’t Look Away: Bearing Witness to Ice Abuses in Immigration Court.” The Advocate, July 18, 2025, https://advocate.nyc.gov/blog/bear-witness-ice-abuse.
