Tacoma Immigration Court Remote Appearance Changes Create New Burden for Attorneys

What Is Changing at the Tacoma Immigration Court?

According to recent reporting, attorneys have experienced increasing denials of requests to appear remotely before the Tacoma Immigration Court since approximately mid-August 2026. Attorneys quoted in the reporting say the practice has created uncertainty because they may receive relatively short notice that an in-person appearance is required.

The issue is particularly significant for lawyers representing detained respondents who are located far from Tacoma. Idaho does not have its own immigration court, and attorneys representing clients whose cases are handled in Washington or elsewhere have historically relied on remote appearances in appropriate circumstances.

How the Change Affects Attorneys

For attorneys located outside Washington, an in-person appearance can involve substantially more than the time spent in the courtroom. Lawyers may need to arrange airfare, lodging, transportation, and schedule adjustments, sometimes on short notice.

The burden can be especially significant for solo practitioners and small firms. A short master calendar hearing may still require a full day or more of travel. If a hearing is postponed, canceled, or the respondent has been transferred to another facility, the attorney may have already incurred substantial expenses.

Recent reporting also describes attorneys being concerned that the additional travel requirements could make some lawyers less willing to accept cases involving respondents whose proceedings are assigned to Tacoma. That could be particularly consequential in areas where immigration attorneys already serve clients across large geographic distances.

Why This Matters for Detained Immigrants

The practical consequences are not limited to attorneys. Detained immigrants generally cannot choose where their immigration case is heard, and detention facilities may be located far from the lawyer's office. When an attorney cannot appear remotely, the respondent's ability to maintain representation may become more difficult and expensive.

Attorneys quoted in the recent reporting have raised concerns that requiring frequent travel could discourage lawyers from taking detained cases or make it harder for existing counsel to continue representing clients. For detained respondents, continuity of representation can be particularly important because hearings may involve custody, removal proceedings, applications for relief, or other time-sensitive issues.

The situation also illustrates a broader challenge in immigration court practice: immigration cases routinely cross state boundaries. A respondent may be detained in one state, have a lawyer in another, and have a case assigned to an immigration court in a third location.

What Attorneys and Clients Should Know

Remote appearance procedures are not necessarily uniform across immigration courts or from one hearing to another. The fact that remote hearings have been available in the past does not necessarily mean that an attorney can assume a future hearing will be handled remotely.

Before an upcoming hearing, attorneys and respondents should pay particular attention to the hearing notice and any instructions issued by the immigration court or immigration judge. If there is uncertainty about the hearing medium, EOIR advises contacting the immigration court. The agency's current court information specifically directs parties who are uncertain whether a hearing is in person or internet-based to contact the court.

1. Confirm whether the hearing is scheduled as an in-person or internet-based hearing.
2. Review any order or instruction concerning an attorney's remote appearance.
3. Do not assume that a prior remote appearance guarantees permission to appear remotely at the next hearing.
4. If travel is required, account for the possibility of transfers, continuances, or other last-minute changes.

Remote Hearings Can Change — Be Prepared

The reported developments in Tacoma are a reminder that immigration court procedures can have immediate practical consequences for both lawyers and their clients. A change in how appearances are handled can affect travel, legal fees, scheduling, and the availability of counsel, particularly in detained cases.

Attorneys representing clients before immigration courts should monitor court-specific requirements and confirm appearance procedures rather than relying solely on past experience. Respondents and their families should also understand that an attorney's ability to appear remotely may depend on the particular court and hearing.

The Executive Office for Immigration Review's current public information lists internet-based hearing access for the Tacoma Immigration Court, but the recent reports from practitioners demonstrate why case-specific confirmation remains important.