Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

As Immigration Hearings Accelerate, Somali Asylum Seekers Fear Losing Due Process

News

Women gathered in circle.

Somali women and girls prepare for a buraanbur performance at the Tukwila Community Center on Jan. 24, 2026.

Patty Tang

Across the Seattle region, Somali families are living with a level of fear that few others in our city fully see. This fear is rooted in sudden immigration court changes and in a national climate that feels increasingly unstable for people seeking asylum.

In recent months, immigration attorneys in multiple states, including here in Washington, have reported that Somali asylum hearings were abruptly rescheduled to earlier dates, in some cases moved forward by months or even years. Families who believed they had time to prepare are now scrambling to gather documentation, secure legal representation, and revisit traumatic experiences under compressed timelines.


Nationally, the immigration court system is facing a historic backlog. According to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University (TRAC), there are more than 1.5 million pending immigration cases in the United States, including hundreds of thousands of asylum claims. TRAC data shows that the backlog has steadily increased over the past decade, placing enormous strain on due-process protections and access to timely adjudication.

While reducing backlog is important, accelerating individual cases without expanding access to legal representation risks creating a different kind of injustice. Research consistently shows that representation dramatically impacts asylum outcomes. A study by the American Immigration Council found that detained immigrants with legal representation were up to five times more likely to obtain relief than those without counsel. In asylum cases specifically, representation is one of the strongest predictors of success.

When hearings are moved up with limited notice, asylum seekers may not have adequate time to secure attorneys, gather affidavits, obtain country condition reports, or prepare testimony. Due process depends not only on having a hearing, but on having a meaningful opportunity to present evidence.

For Somali nationals, the anxiety is heightened by longstanding instability in Somalia. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has repeatedly designated Somalia for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) due to armed conflict and extraordinary conditions. TPS has been extended multiple times over the years because of persistent insecurity and humanitarian concerns. Although TPS policy decisions are separate from asylum adjudications, Somali families closely watch federal shifts in protection policies and worry about broader enforcement consequences.

There are also circulating fears about deportation to third countries, including Uganda. While formal removal arrangements depend on federal policy and bilateral agreements, even the perception of possible third-country transfers creates profound distress for asylum seekers who lack permanent status elsewhere. For families who have fled violence, uncertainty about potential removal locations deepens trauma.

Immigration court data also shows disparities in outcomes depending on geography and adjudicator assignment. Research examining federal immigration court decisions has documented significant variation in asylum grant rates across judges and jurisdictions. These disparities underscore why procedural safeguards and adequate preparation time matter.

Seattle and King County are home to one of the largest Somali communities in the United States. Somali residents are entrepreneurs, health care workers, faith leaders, students, and parents volunteering in schools. Many fled civil war, political persecution, or extremist violence. They came here believing in the promise of protection under U.S. asylum law, which is grounded in the Immigration and Nationality Act and international refugee conventions.

Seattle often describes itself as a welcoming and equity-centered city. That commitment is tested in moments like this. Efficiency in immigration courts cannot come at the cost of fairness. Policymakers must ensure that docket management reforms do not undermine access to counsel or due process rights. Clear communication from federal agencies is also essential. When communities do not receive transparent information, fear fills the vacuum.

Somali asylum seekers are asking a basic question: Will we have a fair chance to tell our story?

Due process is not a technicality. It is the foundation of a just immigration system. If we believe in fairness and human dignity, then we must insist that procedural protections remain at the center of asylum adjudication.

The families affected are not abstractions. They are our neighbors. Their safety and stability are part of Seattle's future.


Ubax Gardheere is a King County–based advocate for racial equity and transformative justice. Born in exile and shaped by experiences of economic injustice and forced migration across East Africa, she has called King County home for more than 30 years.

As Immigration Hearings Accelerate, Somali Asylum Seekers Fear Losing Due Process was originally published by the South Seattle Emerald and is republished with permission.


Read More

The Long Tradition of Lawyers Defending U.S. Democracy

women in a courtroom

Getty Images

The Long Tradition of Lawyers Defending U.S. Democracy

For centuries, lawyers have been leaders in establishing and protecting our democracy and its cornerstone, the rule of law. They have challenged tyrants, whether it be King George III in our nation’s founding or President Trump, a wannabe king, today.

Lawyers swear to do this in an oath, which is a condition of admission to the bar, to “support the Constitution of the United States.” This sworn duty continues a centuries-old tradition.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Trump Administration Is Losing Its Fight to Take Over Elections
Rawpixel/Getty

The Trump Administration Is Losing Its Fight to Take Over Elections

The Trump administration has expended significant resources trying to meddle in elections ahead of the midterms. This coordinated campaign includes attempts to limit who can vote, wrestle away states’ authority over elections, and undermine public confidence in election outcomes. So far, virtually everything the administration has tried has been blocked by courts, failed in Congress, or simply fizzled out.

Currently, the administration is 0–21 in its court cases seeking to amass state voter data. In dozens of states, election officials from both parties have refused to turn over their complete voter rolls, which contain confidential personal information, to the Justice Department. Federal courts from Arizona to Maine have thrown out the department’s lawsuits, ruling that the federal government lacks the power to force states to hand over this data on a mass scale.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Erosion of Judicial Integrity
a large white building with columns with United States Supreme Court Building in the background

The Erosion of Judicial Integrity

The partisanship of the Roberts Supreme Court Republicans violates the neutrality central to the rule of law's legitimacy. Moreover, the Founding Fathers, including James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Alexander Hamilton, viewed avaricious oligarchs and seditious demagogues as the two gravest threats to democracy. They would doubtlessly view the Roberts Republicans – with rulings institutionalizing oligarchic pay-to-play while embracing Trump’s authoritarianism - as another grave threat.

The Rule of Law Survived One Judicial Coup

Keep ReadingShow less
Impunity: Democracy and the Toll of Unchecked Harm

Lady Justice

Photo provided

Impunity: Democracy and the Toll of Unchecked Harm

Impunity is not only the failure to punish. It is a public answer to the question of whether harm matters.

Every democracy must repeatedly answer the question of impunity. When public trust is violated, or when law itself is manipulated or attacked, penalties matter. But the deeper question is whether a society can recognize injury and prevent further harm when it has lost the ability to clearly name wrongdoing.

Keep ReadingShow less