Overseas Insider is sponsored by:
“This seems extremely unusual,” said a senior Justice Department official familiar with EOIR operations, who requested anonymity to discuss internal matters. Officials could not confirm whether Burns uses AI to draft full written decisions or simply uses text-to-speech software to read his written decisions, as reviewed by audio files. expatriate insider,
This concern comes months after Acting EOIR Director Cyrus E. Owen circulated Policy Memorandum 25‑40, which acknowledged that immigration courts have “neither an absolute ban on the use of generative AI in their proceedings nor a mandatory disclosure requirement regarding its use.”
The August memo—distributed internally to all immigration judges and court administrators—allowed individual courts to adopt local standing orders on the use of AI, but did not require them to disclose when such technologies are implemented in decisions.
The memo appears to remove any restrictions on text-to-voice or AI-generated decision delivery and leaves it to the discretion of individual judges. Burns appears to be among the first to take advantage of that difference. His court assistants said the use of “voice rendering” software began earlier this year and is now a regular feature of his rulings.
Burns’ use of AI tools comes amid controversy over his record as one of the most restrictive immigration judges in the country. according to data compiled by
Burns approved just 2 percent of asylum claims between fiscal years 2019 and 2025 — compared to the national average of 57.7 percent. tracer data Show the same 2 percent benchmark, which puts it among the lowest nationwide.
These data have prompted criticism from immigration advocates, who say the conflation of excessive denial rates with opaque AI-assisted adjudication jeopardizes defendants’ trust in the system. An immigration attorney practicing before the Broadway court said, “When a person’s liberty depends on the judge’s voice, there must be certainty that it is the judge’s own reasoning – not a synthesized layer of technology.”
Internal EOIR emails released via memo show that Burns’ path to the bench was unusually political. Initially interviewed in May 2020, he was rated “highly qualified” by two Assistant Chief Immigration Judges for his litigation experience, but overall he was ranked as “not recommended”. Senior EOIR leadership later scrapped that ranking – reclassifying him as “highly recommended” in September 2020, just as Trump-era DOJ officials accelerated appointments of judges with prosecutorial backgrounds.
At the time of his selection, Burns served as Assistant Chief Counsel for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in New York, where he represented the government in removal proceedings and appeals. His resume and military record were cited in the announcement of his final appointment in December, as one of 14 judges nominated by the outgoing administration. According to EOIR data logs, almost all came from government enforcement roles.
The Burns memo is part of a broader DOJ paper trail that signals a systematic reshaping of the immigration judiciary. Recent EOIR correspondence refers to the removal through dismissal and resignation of more than 125 judges since January, who have been replaced by politically appointed judges.
One August rules Hiring standards were further loosened, allowing the Attorney General to appoint “any licensed attorney” as a temporary immigration judge.
Trump’s DOJ can now make any lawyer an immigration judge
EOIR declined to comment on Burns’ use of text-to-voice technology or his designation history. A Justice Department spokesperson responded only that “immigration judges apply the law to the facts of each case.”
But as AI applications quietly enter the immigration courtroom without disclosure requirements or oversight, experts warn of rapid change. A former EOIR official said, “We are seeing the automation of decisions in a system that already struggles with fairness.” “When the human element disappears, accountability also disappears.”
If you’ve read this far, you understand why transparency matters. If you value this kind of investigation, subscribe Or donate To help diaspora insiders keep up the pressure for answers.
<a href