RICHMOND, Va.—The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit today dismissed without prejudice a case challenging a Department of Justice policy silencing immigration judges. The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University challenged the policy on behalf of the National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ), arguing that the policy violates the First Amendment right of immigration judges to speak publicly on matters of public concern, and the public’s right to hear them.

“We’re disappointed in the court’s decision. Public servants should not have to jump through futile administrative hoops to exercise their freedom of speech, said Alex Abdo, litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute. “When the government places a prior restraint on the expression of public employees, they should be able to go to court to challenge that restraint immediately, without delay. With immigration policy at the center of national debate, it’s more important than ever that the public hear what immigration judges have to say.”

In 2020, the Knight Institute filed this lawsuit on behalf of NAIJ, challenging an Executive Office for Immigration Review policy that prohibits immigration judges from speaking publicly in their personal capacities about immigration or the agency that employs them. A district court dismissed the case in 2023, holding that the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 requires such claims to proceed through administrative review.

In June 2025, the Fourth Circuit revived the case, expressing concern that recent actions by the Trump administration may have undermined the agencies charged with hearing federal employment claims—the Office of Special Counsel and Merit Systems Protection Board—and that they may no longer be operating as Congress intended. But the court also held that, if that system is functioning as Congress intended, immigration judges would be required to challenge the policy through that administrative process rather than in federal court.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the government’s request to reverse the appeals court decision, and it also denied NAIJ’s cross-petition for certiorari, which had argued that federal employees should be permitted to challenge broad prior restraints on their speech in federal court without first having to go through cumbersome and potentially futile administrative proceedings. The Supreme Court sent the case back to the Fourth Circuit to address any remaining issues in the case, resulting in today’s decision. 

“NAIJ is disappointed by today’s decision. The court did not reach the merits of NAIJ’s free speech claims, and the case was dismissed without prejudice. NAIJ remains committed to protecting judicial independence and will carefully consider its next steps,” said Holly A. D’Andrea, president of the National Association of Immigration Judges. 

NAIJ is a nonpartisan, nonprofit voluntary association of federal immigration judges. Its members have long participated in public conversations and events about immigration law, including through teaching, training, and community engagement.

Read today’s decision here.

Read more about the lawsuit, Margolin v. National Association of Immigration Judges, here.

Lawyers on the case include Ramya Krishnan, Alex Abdo, Xiangnong (George) Wang, and Jameel Jaffer of the Knight First Amendment Institute.

For more information, contact: Lorraine Kenny, [email protected].