The closure of San Francisco’s immigration court in September has moved thousands of cases to Concord, transforming the Bay Area’s only remaining immigration court into a busier and increasingly scrutinized venue for people facing deportation. Court observer Jere Ramsey said the number of hearings tracked at Concord rose from an average of about 43 a month earlier this year to 104 in October. Observers have also raised concerns about “mega-master hearings,” in which dozens of people may be scheduled for the same session, sometimes with little notice. Some immigrants have had hearings moved forward by years. Heliodoro Moreno, senior removal defense attorney with Stand Together Contra Costa, said clients with final hearings set for 2028 or 2029 were given only a few weeks to appear. That can leave little time to find a lawyer or prepare evidence, he said. Devony Hodson, an immigrant from Nicaragua, said she received notice on May 10 that her hearing had been advanced from 2027 to July. After extensions in July and September, her final hearing is now scheduled for December 2028. Hodson came to the Bay Area to join her daughters, who had arrived in the United States as unaccompanied minors and were at risk of entering foster care. The Executive Office for Immigration Review, which oversees the courts, said it prioritizes completing cases in a timely manner and adjusts schedules to prevent cases from languishing. The agency said more scheduling changes could follow the appointment of additional immigration judges. Attorneys are advising immigrants to check their case status online regularly so they do not miss a hearing. The court’s staffing has also changed. When President Donald Trump returned to office in January 2025, EOIR listed 11 judges serving Concord. The agency’s website now lists 20, including at least two assigned to a San Francisco satellite location. More than half of the judges previously serving Concord have been fired and replaced, according to the information cited by court observers. Ramsey said most of the new judges he has seen appear remotely, unlike the court’s four original judges. Advocates say remote proceedings can create confusion. One observer, identified as Lopez, described a woman who sat in the back of a courtroom and was not seen by a remote judge. The woman was ordered removed in absentia and must seek to reopen her case, Lopez said, adding that the process could cost her more than $1,000. Moreno and other veteran immigration lawyers have questioned whether some new judges have enough experience with immigration law. EOIR said the Justice Department removed a requirement that judges have prior immigration-law experience, but said all new judges receive classroom and on-the-job training. Agency announcements show that at least five judges serving Concord previously worked as attorneys for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. A 2025 Justice Department recruiting campaign used the term “deportation judges,” which immigration attorneys and advocates said was not previously used for the role. Moreno said he has seen more asylum cases denied since the department began overhauling the courts. Nationally, the asylum denial rate reached 94.1% in June 2026, according to data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. An immigrant from Mexico, who spoke anonymously, said a Concord judge found her sincere but denied her asylum petition after an April hearing. After nine years in the United States, she said she may have to return to Mexico. The court’s consolidation has drawn questions from U.S. Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, who challenged the rationale for closing San Francisco’s court amid a longstanding national backlog. He said he had not received answers about whether the closure would help reduce that backlog. Immigration attorneys and advocates say more free legal services may need to move from San Francisco to the East Bay to meet the needs of people appearing in Concord. They warn that sudden schedule changes, limited access to representation and uncertainty around remote hearings can have serious consequences for people trying to remain in the country.