Hawaiʻi delegation questions shift to in-person immigration hearings that affect Maui residents

Hawaiʻi’s congressional delegation is pressing the US Department of Justice to explain why the Honolulu Immigration Court has moved away from video appearances. The lawmakers say the change requires Maui residents facing deportation to fly to Oʻahu for hearings.

US Sens. Brian Schatz and Mazie Hirono and US Reps. Ed Case and Jill Tokuda, all Democrats from Hawaiʻi, sent a letter to Sirce Owen, acting director of the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review. They asked what steps the Trump administration will take to ensure that Neighbor Island residents who can’t afford inter-island travel aren’t ordered removed.

Honolulu has the only immigration court in the state. It serves respondents on Maui, Kauaʻi, Hawaiʻi Island, Molokaʻi and Lānaʻi, who must travel by air to reach it. The delegation wrote that the court has long used video conferencing to overcome that obstacle.

The lawmakers cited an analysis of the agency’s own case data. According to the letter, 87% of Neighbor Island respondents with proceedings in July and August 2026 were required to travel to Oʻahu for at least one in-person hearing. In the same period in 2025, just under one-third were.

The letter also says:

• Of the court’s 249 hearings in August 2026, 176 were in person, compared with 38 of 120 in August 2025.
• About 90% of hearings scheduled for October 2026 are marked in person, compared with 22% in October 2025.
• Among respondents with out-of-state addresses, the share required to appear in person rose to 82% from 14%.
• Practitioners report that respondents are being ordered to appear in person even when their attorneys are authorized to appear by video.

“The effect on Neighbor Island families is stark,” the delegation wrote. The lawmakers said a single hearing can mean inter-island airfare, an overnight hotel stay on Oʻahu, lost work hours and unexpected child care costs.

They said respondents who can’t make the trip risk an in absentia removal order, regardless of the merits of their asylum applications or petitions to adjust status. The letter says Hawaiʻi practitioners report that an increasing share of their clients are waiving viable claims rather than face those costs.

The lawmakers noted that the Immigration and Nationality Act permits video hearings. They also pointed to a 2022 agency memorandum, Director’s Memorandum 22-07, that directed immigration judges to accommodate remote-appearance requests where appropriate and practicable. The lawmakers said they understand the agency rescinded that memo in March 2025.

The delegation said the agency now asserts that its director lacks the authority to tell judges how to rule on video hearing motions. If that is accurate, the lawmakers wrote, the same principle of judicial independence would bar agency leaders from encouraging judges to deny such motions.

The delegation requested written answers by Nov. 5. The lawmakers asked the agency to:

• Provide all guidance, training materials and communications given to Honolulu immigration judges since March 14, 2025, on video or telephonic appearances, venue changes and in-person scheduling, along with any performance measures or expectations that could affect those decisions.
• Say whether it has adopted any formal or informal policy to limit video appearances in Honolulu or nationwide, and if not, explain the changes.
• Provide Honolulu Immigration Court data for June 1 through Sept. 30, 2026, and the same period in 2025, on in-person and video hearings; motions to appear by video and to change venue, including how many were granted and denied; and in absentia removal orders. The lawmakers asked that the figures be broken out by county of residence, out-of-state residence and detention status.
• Say whether it will presume that respondents and attorneys who can reach the court only by air may appear by video unless an in-person hearing is specifically found necessary; set up video hearings or hearing days at least monthly on Maui, Kauaʻi and Hawaiʻi Island; and require written rulings on video-appearance motions filed by respondents living outside Oʻahu before requiring them to travel.

“Hawaiʻi’s unique geography does not eliminate the due process rights of our nation’s immigrants,” the delegation wrote.

To see the delegation’s letter click here.