Real Courts, Rule of Law Act of 2026
Sponsored By: Representative Lofgren
Introduced
Summary
Creates an independent United States Immigration Courts. This bill would set up a three-division, Article I immigration court system outside the executive branch and lay out who serves as judges, how cases are decided, and basic court rules.
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
6 provisions identified: 6 benefits, 0 costs, 0 mixed.
Judge pay, retirement, and recall rules
If enacted, appeals judges would be paid the same annual salary as U.S. district court judges and trial judges would be paid 92% of that salary. The bill would set retirement eligibility (for example, 65 with 15 years through 70 with 10 years) and require mandatory retirement at age 80. Recalled retired judges would be paid the position rate minus their retirement annuity and be treated as reemployed annuitants. The Appellate Division could appoint temporary judges or recall judges when resources are short, but temporary authority ends after 210 days unless Congress extends it.
How immigration judges are chosen
If enacted, the Appellate Division would include 21 appeals judges nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate for 15-year terms. Trial judges would be appointed by the Appellate Division for 15-year terms. Judges would need at least 10 years of bar membership and demonstrated integrity and judicial temperament. Removal rules would be limited to specific causes and require notice and a hearing, with appeals judges removable by the President and trial judges removable by the Appellate Division.
New independent immigration court system
If enacted, the bill would create an independent Article I United States Immigration Courts system separate from the executive branch. The Courts would have Appellate, Trial, and Administrative Divisions and a principal office near Washington, DC, and could sit anywhere in the U.S. Most EOIR functions, staff, records, and funds would transfer to the new Courts on the application date, and pending cases would move without loss of rights. Judges serving in EOIR before the transfer could become interim trial judges and get limited credit toward retirement.
Stronger court rules, interpreters, and counsel
If enacted, the bill would require respondents to get reasonable notice and a chance to rebut charges and would require judges to verify identity and keep records. Courts would provide qualified interpreters and a Legal Orientation Program with legal services groups. Hearings may be in person or by video under new rules. If the Government appeals and a respondent cannot obtain adequate counsel, appellate representation would be provided under the plan in 18 U.S.C. 3006A. The chief judge would also send an annual report to Congress with disaggregated case and outcome data, and the Judicial Conference would review adjudications at least every four years.
Where and how appeals are decided
If enacted, the Trial Division would handle removal cases, rescissions of green cards, credible and reasonable fear reviews, asylum and torture claims, bond and detention decisions, and some practitioner discipline. Appeals would go to the Appellate Division and judicial review in a U.S. Court of Appeals would be in the circuit where the trial judge issued the decision or where the underlying action occurred. The Appellate Division would publish precedent decisions and make non-precedent decisions and records public, while allowing sealing for national security, asylum, and Violence Against Women Act matters. References in existing immigration law to EOIR or the Attorney General would be read to refer to the new Courts as appropriate.
Faster hiring and pay rules for court staff
If enacted, the chief judge and chief administrative officer could hire clerks, law clerks, and other staff without following some Title 5 competitive service rules. The Appellate Division could set pay so staff match similar judicial branch positions when feasible. Among equally qualified applicants, preference would be given to preference-eligible persons such as veterans.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Lofgren
CA • D
Cosponsors
Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8]
MD • D
Sponsored 3/5/2026
Johnson (GA)
GA • D
Sponsored 3/5/2026
Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]
NY • D
Sponsored 3/5/2026
Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2]
RI • D
Sponsored 5/11/2026
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.gov