"Despite public concern with the increasing politicization of U.S. immigration courts, few people are aware of the system's fundamental flaw: the immigration courts are not really 'courts' but an office of the Department of Justice--the nation's law enforcement agency. Alison Peck's original and surprising account shows how paranoia sparked by World War II and the War on Terror drove the structure of the immigration courts. Focusing on previously unstudied decisions in the Roosevelt and Bush administrations, this book divulges both the human tragedy of our current immigration system and the human crises that led to its creation. Peck provides an accessible legal analysis of recent events to make the case for independent immigration courts, proposing that the courts be moved into an independent, Article I court system. As long as the immigration courts remain under the authority of the attorney general, the administration of immigration justice will remain a game of political football--with people's very lives on the line." -- back cover.

This is a book about the immigration court seasoned with observations and some anecdotal humor. The book also serves as a practical guide for attorneys and laymen who are interested in immigration matters within the jurisdiction of the United States immigration courts. In addition, this book also provides a historical overview of the evolution of immigration law in relation to the role of the Immigration Judge, including suggestions for improvements in the institutions that enforce and administer United States immigration law.

The immigration courts are in a period of intense crisis and breakdown, at a moment in history when America's immigration policy is being challenged and redefined. Congress has debated an overhaul of the immigration system since 2006, but proposals for fixing the courts have been largely ignored. The American Bar Association released a 510-page report in February 2010, revealing that a total of 231 immigration judges hear more than 300,000 cases a year, an average of 1,200 for each judge, or three times the load of federal district judges. The ABA reported that judges state that they 'feel overworked, frustrated, and feel like they are on a treadmill.' The judges often feel that their asylum hearings are 'like holding death penalty cases in traffic court,' said Dana L. Marks, an immigration judge and the president of the National Association of Immigration Judges. As the judges' backlog swells so that most immigrants must wait an average of two years for a hearing, the number of decisions appealed to the federal circuit courts has increased from 9 percent of decisions in 2002 to 26 percent in 2008, the report found, virtually overwhelming the federal courts. Due to lack of training and experience of immigration judges, the report found, their decisions 'are often harrowing, haphazard and inconsistent.' The New York Times reported in October 2010 that the immigration backlog in the courts has continued to grow, in spite of calls for reform.

American Immigration Lawyers Association wrote: “With a cast of colorful characters and compelling tales, My Trials: What I Learned in Immigration Court is both a scathing indictment of a broken immigration system that sends vulnerable immigrants back to the perilous situations from which they fled, and a heartfelt call for a return to the values upon which our nation of immigrants was founded.” VOICE magazineGerry Spence, noted trial lawyer, wrote:"Thanks for your good work, Paul. I am not surprised at the horror and inhumanity you have witnessed."“America is famous for priding itself as a nation of immigrants, but the often shabby and sometimes downright abusive treatment that immigrants seeking asylum suffer in our nation's immigration court system is a well-kept secret. The truth is that our government fails to hire prosecuting attorneys and appoint judges with expertise in the field or even adequately train them in the law and procedure. But this failure pales in comparison to the even greater scandal that the immigrants herded into these courts are often treated with disdain, disrespect, or even outright contempt by sworn officers of the law. The often needless, lengthy and costly pre-trial detention of individuals who usually do not represent any danger to the community is an everyday and shameful fact of life in our immigration system.”