Tania Nemer is a former federal immigration judge who served at the Cleveland Immigration Court in Ohio. She joined the U.S. Department of Justice in 2023 and was removed from her position on February 5, 2025, shortly after the start of President Donald Trump’s second administration. Nemer later filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Justice and the U.S. attorney general, alleging that her termination violated Title VII and the First Amendment. The government disputes her legal theory and has asked the court to dismiss the case.
Here is a clear look at Judge Tania Nemer’s background, her former immigration-court role, the lawsuit, her legal team, and the latest public case information.
Table of Contents
Tania Nemer At a Glance
Who Is Tania Nemer?
Tania Nemer is an Ohio attorney and public official who previously worked in immigration law and local government. Before becoming an immigration judge, she worked as an immigration attorney with Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Cleveland. She also held local judicial and prosecutorial roles, including positions as an Akron Municipal Court magistrate, a probate-court magistrate, and a community outreach prosecutor in Summit County, according to local reporting.
The public case materials list James Eisenmann and Nathaniel Zelinsky, along with other attorneys from Alden Law Group and Washington Litigation Group.
Nemer also previously ran unsuccessfully for a Stow Municipal Court judicial seat in Ohio in 2019. Her political activity became relevant to the allegations in her later lawsuit because she claims the government considered her political affiliation or activity when ending her federal appointment. That allegation has not been finally decided by the court.
Judge Tania Nemer’s Role At The Cleveland Immigration Court
The Executive Office for Immigration Review, or EOIR, operates within the Department of Justice and oversees the federal immigration-court system. Immigration judges decide cases involving noncitizens who may face removal from the United States. Depending on the case, those proceedings can involve asylum, protection from persecution, cancellation of removal, adjustment of status, or other forms of relief under immigration law.
Nemer was officially appointed as an immigration judge in 2023 and assigned to the Cleveland Immigration Court. The Justice Department’s announcement of new immigration judges identified Tania T. Nemer as an appointee to that court.
Immigration judges are called judges, but they work within the executive branch rather than the independent federal judiciary created under Article III of the Constitution. That distinction sits at the center of Nemer’s lawsuit. Her lawsuit raises questions about the extent to which the executive branch can remove an immigration judge and whether federal employment and constitutional protections still apply when the government exercises that authority.
What Happened To Tania Nemer’s Federal Role?
On February 5, 2025, Nemer was told that her employment as an immigration judge ended immediately. Nemer says her supervisor interrupted a hearing and informed her that she had been terminated. She also says she was not given a clear reason for the decision at the time. NBC News reported that Nemer joined the Department of Justice in 2023 and that the termination occurred shortly after the second Trump administration began.
Nemer’s lawyers say she had received strong performance feedback and that the government did not provide a coherent explanation for removing her. The government’s position, as described in the case materials and reporting, is that executive officials had authority to remove her and that the complaint did not adequately establish a legally viable discrimination or First Amendment claim.
Why Was Tania Nemer Removed As An Immigration Judge?
The publicly reported record does not show a final judicial finding that establishes the reason for Nemer’s termination. Nemer alleges that the decision was connected to her sex, Lebanese national origin, immigrant family background, and political affiliation. She also says other similarly situated judges were retained while she was removed.
Her legal team argues that the government cannot avoid federal anti-discrimination law by labeling an immigration judge an inferior officer who may be removed at will. The complaint challenges the position that Article II of the Constitution gives the president or attorney general unrestricted authority to remove an immigration judge, including for a discriminatory reason.
In an earlier administrative decision described by NBC News, the Justice Department’s Equal Employment Opportunity office concluded that the removal was a lawful exercise of executive authority and that Title VII did not protect Nemer from the termination in the way she argued. Nemer challenges that conclusion in federal court. The court has not yet determined whether discrimination or political retaliation caused Nemer’s termination.
What Is Tania Nemer’s Lawsuit About?
Nemer filed Nemer v. Bondi in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on December 1, 2025. The defendants named in the public docket include then-Attorney General Pamela Bondi and the Department of Justice. The case includes a jury demand.
The complaint is built around two main legal arguments:
1. Title VII employment discrimination
Nemer alleges that her termination violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII generally prohibits covered employers from discriminating against employees because of characteristics including sex and national origin. Her complaint argues that the federal government cannot use executive removal power as a license to discriminate against a federal employee.
2. First Amendment protection for political activity
Nemer also alleges that her political affiliation or protected political activity played a role in the termination. She had previously run for local office as a Democrat. Her lawsuit argues that the government’s treatment of her violated constitutional protections related to political activity and association.
Nemer seeks remedies that include a declaration that the government violated her rights, reinstatement or rescission of the termination, back pay, injunctive relief, and attorney fees. The exact remedies available will depend on the court’s rulings and the legal claims that survive.
The government moved to dismiss the case on April 6, 2026. According to the public docket, Nemer filed her opposition on May 11, and the defendants filed a reply on June 8. The docket materials reviewed for this article show that the case remained ongoing and that the court had not issued a final merits decision in the publicly available case summary.
Tania Nemer Immigration Judge Case Timeline
2023: Appointment to the immigration bench
Nemer joined the Department of Justice as an immigration judge and was assigned to the Cleveland Immigration Court in Ohio. The Justice Department listed her among its 2023 immigration-judge appointments.
February 5, 2025: Immediate termination
Nemer says she was informed while conducting a hearing that her appointment was ending immediately. She says officials did not provide a clear explanation at the time.
2025: Administrative discrimination complaint
Nemer pursued an administrative complaint alleging discrimination. Reporting on the matter says the Justice Department’s EEO office rejected the complaint and treated the removal as an exercise of executive authority. Nemer disputes that reasoning.
December 1, 2025: Federal lawsuit filed
Nemer filed Nemer v. Bondi in federal court in Washington, D.C. The complaint named the Department of Justice and the attorney general and alleged violations involving Title VII and the First Amendment.
February-March 2026: Government response deadlines extended
The defendants entered an appearance and requested additional time to respond. The court extended the deadline more than once before the government filed its motion to dismiss.
April 6, 2026: Motion to dismiss filed
The Department of Justice and Bondi moved to dismiss the complaint. Their position challenges whether Nemer stated viable claims and emphasizes the executive branch’s authority over the appointment and removal of immigration judges.
May-June 2026: Briefing on dismissal motion
Nemer filed her opposition on May 11, 2026. The Constitutional Accountability Center received permission to file an amicus brief supporting her position. The government filed its reply on June 8.
October 2026: Case remains active
Public case information still lists the matter as ongoing. Later orders or filings could change that status.
Who Is Tania Nemer’s Attorney?
Nemer is represented by a team that includes Nathaniel Zelinsky and James Eisenmann. Her counsel also includes lawyers associated with Washington Litigation Group and Alden Law Group. The representation listed by Washington Litigation Group includes Mary Dohrmann, James Pearce, Samantha Bateman, and Kyle Freeny, in addition to Zelinsky and Eisenmann.
Readers should note that Nemer herself is an attorney by profession, while the lawyers above represent her in the federal case. The CourtListener docket is the better source for checking formal appearances because counsel can change during litigation.
What Is Tania Nemer Doing Now?
Nemer is no longer serving as an immigration judge. Local reporting has described her as working in Summit County, Ohio, including a role in the Summit County Prosecutor’s Office. She has also pursued a judicial campaign for a Summit County Common Pleas Court seat while challenging her federal termination.
Her current work does not mean she has returned to the federal immigration bench. As of the latest public information reviewed here, she remains a former immigration judge and a plaintiff in the ongoing federal case.
Why The Tania Nemer Case Matters
The lawsuit could have significance beyond Nemer’s own employment dispute because it touches on how the U.S. immigration-court system is structured. Immigration judges decide cases with serious consequences for people facing removal, yet they work within the executive branch. That creates an ongoing debate about independence, supervision, performance management, and removal authority.
The lawsuit also tests the relationship between executive power and federal employment protections. If the court accepts Nemer’s position, the decision could affect how the government treats certain executive-branch officers and how employees challenge allegedly discriminatory removals. If the government prevails, the ruling could reinforce a broader view of executive authority over immigration judges.
The outcome cannot be predicted from the current filings. A motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint; it does not by itself decide whether the factual allegations are true.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. Was Tania Nemer an immigration judge?
Yes. Tania T. Nemer served as a federal immigration judge at the Cleveland Immigration Court in Ohio after her 2023 appointment.
Q. Is Tania Nemer still an immigration judge?
No. Public reporting and the federal case record identify her as a former immigration judge. She says she was terminated on February 5, 2025.
Q. Why was Tania Nemer removed?
The final legal reason has not been established by a court. Nemer alleges that discrimination and political affiliation influenced the decision. The government argues that executive officials had authority to remove her and has sought dismissal of her lawsuit.
Q. What is Nemer v. Bondi?
Nemer v. Bondi is a federal lawsuit filed in the District of Columbia concerning Nemer’s termination from the Department of Justice. The complaint raises Title VII and First Amendment theories.
Q. Who represents Tania Nemer?
Her publicly identified counsel includes Nathaniel Zelinsky and James Eisenmann, with additional lawyers from Washington Litigation Group and Alden Law Group. Counsel listings may change, so the federal docket remains the most reliable source for current appearances.
Q. What is the latest update in the case?
The latest public filings reviewed for this article show that the government’s motion to dismiss remains the key pending issue. No final ruling on the merits has been identified.
Final Takeaway
Tania Nemer is a former Cleveland immigration judge whose February 2025 termination led to a federal lawsuit against the Department of Justice and the attorney general. Her case alleges that sex, national origin, and political affiliation influenced the decision and argues that executive removal authority does not override federal anti-discrimination and constitutional protections.
The government disputes those claims, and the court has not yet issued a final ruling. The case will turn on whether Nemer’s allegations can proceed under Title VII and the First Amendment.
