An analysis of each of the 70 immigration judges' professional backgrounds found that judges with backgrounds defending immigrants, and no prior work history at DHS, made up about 44% of the firings — more than double the share of those who had only prior work history at DHS.
Still on the bench: NPR also analyzed the classes of judges onboarded between February 2023 and November 2024, who would have neared the ends of their probationary periods this year or are still in the probationary period. Of those judges, those who had prior DHS experience, including working as asylum officers and as attorneys for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, made up the largest share still on the bench.
Response to reports: A DOJ spokesperson disputed the 70 count, saying the agency has terminated fewer than 55 judges, but was unable to provide more details. The agency's number is inconsistent with other news reports, NPR's prior reporting and the union. NPR reached out to reconcile the numbers. The DOJ spokesperson said staff have been furloughed and the Justice Department is not able to confirm their data.
Read on... how employees are searching for reasons.
Kyra Lilien, who was hired in 2023, was presiding in a courtroom in Concord, Calif., in July when she paused the hearing of an immigrant seeking asylum to read an email.
"I told them that we were not going to have a hearing because I had just been fired," Lilien said. Present in the court was a court interpreter and an attorney for the Department of Homeland Security. "They asked me if I was joking."
Anam Petit, who was hired as an immigration judge in 2023 after a career in immigrant defense, was sitting on the bench in her courtroom in Virginia's Annandale Immigration Court in September. It was her two-year anniversary in the position and she was between hearings when she got the email.
"My voice was shaking. My hands were shaking. My mind was racing. And I gave the decision and I dismissed everyone without mentioning anything," Petit said. One decision that day was to deny asylum, and the other was a partial denial, each for a different member of one immigrant family, she recalled.
Tania Nemer was hired as a judge at the Cleveland immigration court in 2023. She had about 30 or 40 immigrants, a DHS attorney and staff in her court one morning in February. She had just finished explaining rights and responsibilities to the group when her door opened and her manager asked her to come with him. She was later escorted out of the building.
"I didn't know at all why I was being fired at the time. And I kept asking; no one had a reason," Nemer said.
Nemer was one of the first immigration judges fired by the Trump administration after a slew of dismissals of leaders at the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), the branch of the Justice Department that houses immigration courts. Later that month, the administration fired 12 judges — an entire incoming class that had just been trained and was about to take the bench.
Those dismissals come as the administration has ramped up mass deportations of those without legal status, and sometimes pointed to judges as obstacles in that effort.
The pattern has been consistent. Every few months this year, a new class of judges gets termination notices in the middle of the day, often while they are in the middle of immigration court proceedings. The notices often target those who have reached the end of their two-year probationary period, a trial period for federal workers before they are "converted" to permanent employees. It was previously common for these civil servants to be converted to permanent employees of the DOJ.
"None of us have been given an explanation, we are in the dark, but we've been trying to ascertain patterns," Lilien said, the former judge in northern California. She wonders if her past experience representing immigrants got her fired, even though she also worked at DHS as an asylum officer.
Her hunch has some correlation with the data. NPR has independently identified 70 immigration judges who received termination notices from the Trump administration between February and October. The number of judges who received termination letters matches the tally kept by the immigration judges' union. It also accords with NPR's past coverage of the terminations.
The count does not include assistant chief immigration judges (ACIJ), who are courthouse supervisors and also have their own dockets. The union has counted 11 ACIJs terminated.
An analysis of each of the 70 immigration judges' professional backgrounds found that judges with backgrounds defending immigrants, and no prior work history at DHS, made up about 44% of the firings — more than double the share of those who had only prior work history at DHS.
NPR also analyzed the classes of judges onboarded between February 2023 and November 2024, who would have neared the ends of their probationary periods this year or are still in the probationary period. Of those judges, those who had prior DHS experience, including working as asylum officers and as attorneys for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, made up the largest share still on the bench.
Loading...
NPR reached out to the DOJ, EOIR and the White House for a comment on the firings and NPR's findings. The press staff at EOIR is furloughed due to the ongoing federal government shutdown, according to automatic email replies, though immigration courts are still operational. The White House referred questions to the DOJ.
"DOJ doesn't 'target' or 'prioritize' immigration judges for any personnel decision one way or the other based on prior experience," a DOJ spokesperson told NPR in a statement. "DOJ continually evaluates all immigration judges, regardless of background, on factors such as conduct, impartiality/bias, adherence to the law, productivity/performance, and professionalism."
The spokesperson added that, "pursuant to Article II of the Constitution, IJs (Immigration Judges) are inferior officers who are appointed and removed by the Attorney General."
The spokesperson disputed the 70 count, saying the agency has terminated fewer than 55 judges, but was unable to provide more details. The agency's number is inconsistent with other news reports, NPR's prior reporting and the union. NPR reached out to reconcile the numbers. The DOJ spokesperson said staff have been furloughed and the Justice Department is not able to confirm their data.
Folders containing documents related to immigration cases are piled on a table in the office of Stephen Born, Esq. on July 31, 2025 in Everett, Mass.
(
Meredith Nierman
/
NPR
)
Employees search for reasons
Firedjudges have been grasping at straws to understand why they were fired — some have filed Freedom of Information Act requests. Others have turned to wrongful termination complaints and lawsuits. Some worry they were targeted on the basis of protected classes, such as gender or race.
"I fit the bill," said Nemer, who had represented immigrants prior to becoming an immigration judge. Nemer listed off characteristics cited in a lawsuit she has filed, arguing she was fired based on various protected classes.
"It's hard to know without having the explanations of why judges were fired," said Kathleen Bush-Joseph, policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan organization that focuses on immigration policy. "But the way the Trump administration is approaching immigration courts reflects a really high prioritization of immigration enforcement and [the administration] has really made deportations this whole-of-government effort."
Each fired judge can leave behind thousands of cases, according to several interviews with fired judges throughout the year. Each case is an immigrant who has likely already waited years for their day in court, to make the case for why they should be allowed to stay in the U.S.
Many of these cases have now been reassigned to other judges, at the bottom of their already years-long dockets. Immigrants whose cases were already in progress, or set to be reviewed soon, now have new dates as far out as 2029.
There were 700 immigration judges at the start of the year. Over the past 10 months, EOIR has lost more than 125 judges to firings and voluntary resignations. Earlier this year, Republicans in Congress approved a spending bill that allocated over $3 billion to the Justice Department for immigration-related activities, including the hiring of more immigration judges, to address the backlog of millions of cases at immigration court.
Federal agents patrol the halls of immigration court at the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building in June 2025 in New York City.
(
Spencer Platt
/
Getty Images
)
Fear of retribution
Probationary judges aren't the only ones who have been fired under the Trump administration. NPR tracked 12 fired judges who started prior to 2023. This means they were fired after their two-year probationary period.
Some have been left wondering if their firings were retribution for the decisions they made on the bench.
Shira Levine had worked for EOIR since 2021 before being fired in September. She was presiding over a hearing for an immigrant who had already waited more than five years for a day in court when she got the email.
"People looked surprised, but no one looked shocked," Levine said. "That's because, unfortunately, this by that point had become a pattern." She said she didn't expect to be removed since she had passed her two-year mark. She was never given a reason.
Levine, like several others, received a standard email that they were being terminated pursuant to Article 2 of the Constitution, which gives the executive the power to dismiss federal employees.
Levine thought she might have been dismissed because of her response to some recent Trump administration policies.
During the summer months, immigration judges had already had to contend with an outsized enforcement presence in normally empty courtroom hallways. ICE attorneys — who argue on behalf of a government that an immigrant should be deported — started more regularly filing "motions to dismiss" cases. When a judge granted such a motion, migrants would be detained before leaving the building.
Levine said such motions should be granted if there is a change in the individual migrant's case, not a change in immigration policy.
"I was not told it was because of my decision to deny the motion to dismiss that I was fired," Levine said. "But I handed down a decision that contravened what they apparently wanted the judges to do."
Others, like Ila Deiss or Emmett Soper, who had been immigration judges since 2017 and 2016, served as career officials at the DOJ for nearly two decades.
Soper had been with EOIR since graduating law school in a variety of other roles. He doesn't know if his firing had anything to do with past policy work under the Biden administration's EOIR director or his handling of cases as a judge.
As the Trump administration brings in new people to the bench, he has concerns over the loss of experienced judges.
"You have to be able to manage your courtroom and you have to make very difficult, sometimes life-or-death decisions, with the person whose life is going to be affected and the family members sometimes right in front of you," Soper said.
"It's not something that you pick up right away. And with all of these judges — many of whom are very experienced — being fired, the agency is losing something that will take a long time to get back, if they ever can."
People wait outside an immigration court and ICE field office on Oct. 24, 2025, in San Francisco.
(
Minh Connors
/
AP
)
Prior political interference
The agency is prioritizing other judges to hire.
The Trump administration has moved to bring back immigration judges it sees as unfairly fired by the Biden administration. The Justice Department, in a February memo, said that it cannot be confident the Biden administration was ethical and lawful in how it dismissed immigration judges and other adjudicators.
A handful of judges in 2022 had not been converted to permanent employment, sparking GOP outrage over what lawmakers saw as political interference.
Earlier this year, Matthew O'Brien and David White, two of those judges let go under President Joe Biden, were reinstated at immigration courts in Virginia. O'Brien was brought back to a managerial position, as NPR previously reported — though he is no longer with EOIR. White is a judge at the Falls Church court.
The Justice Department appointed a new director of EOIR, Daren Margolin, in October. Margolin has previous experience as the assistant chief immigration judge, or courthouse supervisor, throughout multiple courts in California, and a background as a military and DHS lawyer. He had been fired from a command position at a Marine base for negligently firing a gun and had left EOIR in 2024 before returning to lead the agency.
"EOIR is restoring its integrity as a preeminent administrative adjudicatory agency," the announcement states. "These new immigration judges are joining an immigration judge corps that is committed to upholding the rule of law."
The incoming class of permanent judges comprises mostly those with a background in federal government work, including EOIR itself and the Department of Homeland Security. Their previous jobs included training Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection agents, serving as asylum officers and working for ICE's legal arm.
One judge was originally going to take the bench at the start of the year, but was among the initial class of judges fired before they could start. None of the incoming judges appear to have previously worked in the field of immigrant defense based on EOIR's announcement.
Immigration judges' backgrounds vary over time
In recent years, immigration judges' backgrounds have varied. Many came to the position after several years working for ICE's legal branch. Others became judges after working for immigrant defense nonprofits or in private practice. Some have no immigration law experience, which was previously a requirement for temporary judges but not for permanent ones.
When immigration courts were first established, it was more common for immigration judges to have an enforcement background, said Dana Leigh Marks, a former immigration judge and immigration attorney who litigated landmark immigration cases before the Supreme Court.
Marks joined the court in 1987, when courts were still under the former Immigration and Naturalization Service branch of the DOJ.
"Frankly, I was one of the individuals who was hired to show that it wasn't just a career path of prosecution that led you to be eligible to be an immigration judge," Marks said.
That push for professional diversification carried through the Biden administration. That administration selected as immigration judges not just immigration attorneys, but also criminal defense attorneys, other administrative judges across the federal government, and those with military experience, as it sought to diversify the perspectives of those interpreting the complicated set of immigration laws.
Marks said that the president and his cabinet will continue to affect personnel decisions as long as these courts stay in the executive branch.
"It's common sense that the boss of the prosecutor should not be the boss of the judge," Marks said, recalling the fight to keep immigration courts separate from immigration enforcement when DHS was created in 2002. Enforcement, which is primarily ICE, was separated from the DOJ.
—NPR's Rahul Mukherjee contributed to data analysis for this story. Copyright 2025 NPR
The Lineage warehouse in Boyle Heights on August 31, 2026.
(
Brian Feinzeimer
/
The LA Local
)
Topline:
Lineage Logistics sued a solar power provider and its contractor Thursday, blaming them for the fire that destroyed its cold storage facility and plagued Boyle Heights and surrounding communities with polluted, foul-smelling air for months.
The lawsuit: The company accuses Altus Power, Inc., Los Palos Street Operating, LLC, and Pearce Services of failing to address faults in the massive solar array installed on the 500,000-square-foot facility’s roof. Lineage is seeking more than $1 billion in damages, alleging negligence and breach of contract caused the fire, forced the warehouse to shut down and led to a cleanup effort that has cost more than $100 million. Los Palos, an Altus subsidiary, disputed Lineage’s claims and said that since the cold storage company was the tenant of the building they were responsible for cleanup and debris removal.
The investigation: The fire remains under investigation by the Los Angeles Fire Department, and its cause has not yet been determined. But because both the June and 2024 fires appear to have started around the facility’s roof, the solar array has been long suspected of playing a role in the blaze.
Lineage Logistics sued a solar power provider and its contractor Thursday, blaming them for the fire that destroyed its cold storage facility and plagued Boyle Heights and surrounding communities with polluted, foul-smelling air for months.
The company accuses Altus Power, Inc., Los Palos Street Operating, LLC, and Pearce Services of failing to address faults in the massive solar array installed on the 500,000-square-foot facility’s roof. Faulty electrical in that array led to a fire in 2024, and the same problems sparked the fire on June 17, Lineage claims in the suit.
“This lawsuit is about Altus and Pearce starting this fire and then being nowhere to be found when the community needed help,” said Greg Lehmkuhl, president & CEO of Lineage, in a prepared statement.
The fire remains under investigation by the Los Angeles Fire Department, and its cause has not yet been determined.
But because both the June and 2024 fires appear to have started around the facility’s roof, the solar array has been long suspected of playing a role in the blaze.
Lineage is seeking more than $1 billion in damages, alleging negligence and breach of contract caused the fire, forced the warehouse to shut down and led to a cleanup effort that has cost more than $100 million.
Los Palos, an Altus subsidiary, disputed Lineage’s claims and said that since the cold storage company was the tenant of the building, they were responsible for cleanup and debris removal.
“Lineage’s statement is riddled with misinformation in a blatant attempt to deflect blame for their role in this matter, including any damage caused by the release of substances from the warehouse, not the solar panel,” a Los Palos spokesperson said by email.
A spokesperson for Pearce also disputed Lineage’s claims and said the company would be fighting the suit in court, adding they have been cooperating with the fire department’s investigation.
“Investigation into the fire’s cause, origin, and reasons for its spread remains ongoing, and it is premature for anyone to draw conclusions,” a spokesperson for the company said by email.
The company alleges in the suit that the solar provider used substandard equipment to connect electrical lines and that equipment started the Aug. 14, 2024 fire. The company told Altus, Los Palos, and Pearce, a subsidiary of real estate giant CBRE, to fix the faulty equipment before turning the solar array back on.
Altus and Pearce knew that about 200 faulty electrical connections had been identified by May 2026, including about 10 near the area where the June fire eventually broke out, the suit claims. Lineage says it told the contractors to delay turning the system back on until they provided proof the faults were fixed, but the contractors did so anyway.
“Altus and Pearce deliberately ignored Lineage’s request, prematurely re-energized the solar array, and negligently and recklessly caused this devastating fire,” the suit reads.
Mayor Karen Bass and other elected officials have said publicly that Lineage should not rebuild its facility and continue operating in Boyle Heights. The company missed a 45-day deadline to clean up the facility imposed by Bass in August.
Lineage has since announced it had completed cleanup of the remnants of the facility on Sept. 5. The suit also suggests the company could be planning to stay in Boyle Heights, rather than simply seeking reimbursement for the fire.
The city’s Department of Building and Safety has put its plans to rebuild on hold, and South Coast Air Quality Management District has also issued multiple notices of violation over pollution from food that rotted inside the facility for months.
“This was a solar fire, not a warehouse fire,” reads a press release announcing the suit had been filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court Thursday. “Cold storage is not a risk to communities — it is an essential service that lowers food costs, expands food access and creates jobs,” it added.
Fiona Ng
is LAist's deputy managing editor and leads a team of reporters who explore food, culture, history, events and more.
Published September 10, 2026 3:58 PM
Flowers are left at the Sept. 11 Memorial and Museum in 2024, which is located on the land where the Twin Towers once stood before they were destroyed.
(
Spencer Platt
/
Getty Images
)
Topline:
Here's a list of events in L.A. and O.C. counties on Friday and Saturday remembering 9/11.
Read on... to see when and where events are scheduled near you.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
A new federal lawsuit filed Thursday accuses the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, the FBI and other federal agencies of violating the First Amendment and privacy rights of observers.
About the lawsuit: The lawsuit describes disturbing encounters seven Common Cause members had with federal officers in Maryland, Minnesota and New Jersey after trying to observe immigration enforcement. They include being photographed, followed, reported to police, pepper-sprayed or threatened with a visit to their home by federal officers. Federal officers did show up at one Common Cause member's Minnesota home.
Other lawsuits pending: The new lawsuit follows a handful of other cases brought by observers arguing First Amendment violations, but it is the most sweeping to date, as it includes incidents from multiple states and seeks national relief. It is asking a judge in Washington, D.C., to bar federal agencies from intimidating or retaliating against observers.
For months, Minneapolis resident Michael Khalili drove around the Twin Cities area observing and documenting the activities of federal immigration officers after they swarmed his city last winter as part of an unprecedented surge.
He points out that when federal immigration officers fatally shot fellow Minneapolis observer Alex Pretti in January, it was bystander videos that debunked inaccurate information Trump administration officials were spreading about Pretti, such as that he had committed an act of domestic terrorism and was a "would-be assassin."
"That's the only reason why the government's lies fell apart," Khalili said. "And that's why it's critical that people are out there."
But the 47-year-old father of two stopped observing ICE in recent months due to mounting risk and pressure from his family. Khalili said he follows the law when he drives behind ICE vehicles and is exercising his constitutional rights. But he said he's had repeated tense exchanges with federal officers who have taken photos of him and his vehicle, and told him to stop.
A day after one such exchange in March, Khalili's Global Entry status was revoked (until a HuffPost journalist inquired about it, and it was reinstated). On another occasion in May, he said a state trooper threatened him with a harassment charge for following ICE. Then in June, after 15 Minnesota activists were criminally indicted for conspiracy to impede or injure an officer, Khalili realized one of the counts against a defendant in that case was for following ICE vehicles across state lines in May on the same day Khalili had been warned he could be charged for following ICE. Khalili's wife became worried.
"She was concerned that federal agents could show up at our home and could arrest me in front of our children," Khalili said. "And so I agreed to stop doing this."
But Khalili hasn't given up his quest to hold the federal government accountable. He is now a named plaintiff in a new federal lawsuit filed Thursday, along with the nonprofit Common Cause, that accuses the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, the FBI and other federal agencies of violating the First Amendment and privacy rights of observers.
The new lawsuit follows a handful of other cases brought by observers arguing First Amendment violations, but it is the most sweeping to date, as it includes incidents from multiple states and seeks national relief. It is asking a judge in Washington, D.C. to bar federal agencies from intimidating or retaliating against observers.
"The right of citizens to criticize and hold our government accountable is the backbone of American democracy – and it is under attack," Common Cause's vice president for litigation, Maryam Jazini Dorcheh, told NPR. "We want to make sure we're promoting participation in the political process. And obviously, if government officials are criminalizing peaceful observation, that hinders our mission," Jazini Dorcheh said.
NPR did not receive an immediate response from DHS or DOJ about the lawsuit's allegations. The FBI declined to comment.
The lawsuit describes disturbing encounters seven Common Cause members had with federal officers in Maryland, Minnesota and New Jersey after trying to observe immigration enforcement. They include being photographed, followed, reported to police, pepper-sprayed or threatened with a visit to their home by federal officers. Federal officers did show up at one Common Cause member's Minnesota home.
Observers film as ICE agents leave a residence on Jan. 28, 2026 in Minneapolis. NPR has documented numerous instances of other people legally observing ICE, describing intimidation and threats from the federal government.
(
Stephen Maturen
/
Getty Images
)
In another instance, the suit alleges that ICE officers told local police to ban an unnamed Common Cause member from a public parking lot outside of an ICE facility in Maryland, where the member was observing, and told the member they knew who they were because they had put their face through a facial recognition database.
The 94-page complaint also draws from declarations filed in previous cases on behalf of observers in additional states, including Illinois, Maine and Tennessee.
The events described in the complaint are "not one-off activities. This is not about, like, 'Oh, some folks got out of hand in one place,'" said Danielle Lang, the vice president of voting rights and rule of law at the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center, which is litigating the case. "This is a top-down policy of retaliation and it needs to be addressed as such."
The lawsuit lists multiple directives from the Trump administration, including President Trump's National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7) and the DOJ's memo to operationalize it, which link impeding immigration enforcement and extreme views on migration to domestic terrorism. The NSPM-7 memo was the basis for the federal government to investigate and spy on activists in Minnesota, which ultimately led to the charges against 15 people for conspiracy to impede ICE.
Additionally, the suit lists public statements and internal memos that equate observers who record federal officers with "violent rioters" and "domestic terrorists," to argue there is a national policy in place to retaliate against observers. Furthermore, the Trump administration repealed guardrails that could have prevented federal officers from using facial recognition and license plate readers against peaceful observers, and DHS dismantled its Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, the suit argues.
The suit alleges that the federal government's retaliation against observers includes threatening force or arrest, collecting observers' personal information to intimidate them, using force, pursuing criminal charges, and imposing civil penalties such as administrative subpoenas or revoking observers' Global Entry or TSA PreCheck status.
Michael Khalili was eager to join the Common Cause lawsuit to help fellow observers, since in his case there is documentation of some of his encounters.
"If the paper trail for the petty things that they did to me can keep somebody else from being pepper-sprayed or murdered, like, why would I not do that? How could I not do that?" he told NPR.
Last month he requested access to his state motor vehicle records on the number of times law enforcement officials have queried his license plate, driver's license or name and date of birth. Before he started observing, there were only two such queries. But since March 2026, law enforcement queried him 55 times, a detail that is included in the lawsuit.
In addition, he has a March email from Customs and Border Protection notifying him that his Global Entry membership was revoked. Though the email only stated that the reason given for the change was "Your Global Entry has been revoked," it came one day after ICE officers stopped him, took photos of him and his license plate and told him to stop following them. Other observers in other states have also had their Global Entry status taken away, and some, like Khalili, had theirs reinstated after a reporter inquired.
Khalili still suspects he is on a federal list of some kind, or that there is a flag on him. He recently went on vacation to Ireland with his family and when returning to the U.S, he was referred for additional questioning by U.S. immigration officials.
He hopes this lawsuit can help bring about corrective changes and guardrails after what he calls a "nightmare" that the country and Minneapolis have been through.
"And so that not only will I be able to go out and observe if I so choose, but that there's no reason why I have to go out and observe," Khalili said.
Gab Chabrán
covers what's happening in food and culture for LAist.
Published September 10, 2026 2:06 PM
A finished pan of Chef Joshua Whigham's paella at Casa Leo's monthly Paella Drop, ready to be served to guests.
(
Courtesy Casa Leo
)
Topline:
Chef Joshua Whigham's monthly "paella drop" at Casa Leo in Los Feliz has grown from a 20-guest experiment into a waitlisted fixture.
Tell me more: Each version of his paella — from market mushrooms and truffle to chicken and langoustine — is rooted in a different Spanish region. Casa Leo was added to the Michelin Guide California this year — just over a year after opening.
Why is it important? Most Angelenos' idea of paella starts and stops at chicken, shrimp and saffron rice — the version built for tourists. Whigham, a 15-year veteran of award-winning chef José Andrés' kitchens, is using his monthly drop to highlight the dish’s variety with Southern California produce.
Mark the date: The next drop is on Sept. 20 and features a cuttlefish paella.
Casa Leo is a small Spanish restaurant located in Los Feliz near Griffith Park, where Chef Joshua Whigham is quietly bringing his own fresh approach to Spanish cooking — one that's specific and ingredient-driven in a way you'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere else in the city.
Whigham spent 15 years working under José Andrés — the Michelin-starred, James Beard Award-winning Spanish chef — before striking out on his own a little over a year ago with Casa Leo. The restaurant has already been added to the Michelin Guide California and has built a reputation for a seasonal, genuine, personal approach. That shows up across the menu, from cocas (Iberian flatbreads) to a trout en escabeche dish inspired by Martín Berasategui, the Basque chef often credited as a pioneer of modern Spanish cuisine.
Paella drop
One Sunday each month, Whigham hosts a "paella drop," cooking the paella outside the restaurant on a propane rig built to fit the giant pan he uses. Originally open to just 20 guests, the pop-up has grown in popularity as word has spread — Whigham has incrementally raised the cap over time, and now cooks with an even larger pan that can accommodate up to 70 guests.
It’s a setup that gets a lot of attention. He recalls a group of cyclists zipping by one day, with one of them yelling, "Holy shit, that smells good."
Chef Joshua Whigham stands beside the finished paella, cooked on a custom propane rig large enough to hold his oversized pan.
(
Courtesy CASA LEO
)
"Paella is Spain's national dish," Whigham says — and for many Americans, it's the only regional dish they know by name. Most Americans picture one version of paella — chicken, shrimp, saffron-yellow rice — but the dish looks different depending on where in Spain you are. While the dish has roots in the southeastern region of Valencia, its ingredients and preparation vary widely throughout the country.
Showcasing that variety is one of Whigham’s aims. And he does it with strict adherence to tradition — he'll never include chorizo, since its heavy smoke and paprika flavors, he says, completely overpower the subtle, delicate taste of the saffron, broth and rice.
In August, the paella included market mushrooms, summer truffle, chicken and langoustine.
The next drop, on Sept. 20 (which just so happens to be World Paella Day), is a cuttlefish (sepia) paella.
Whigham wanted the drops to serve as an opportunity to activate the space in ways beyond regular brunch and dinner service.
Not a tourist menu
Whigham says people's exposure to Spanish cuisine often stops at gazpacho, jamón, and that one paella experience they had while studying abroad in college.
His approach, honed over almost two decades of cooking Spanish food, involves first surveying a dish's regional origins and then adapting it using Southern California ingredients, in a process Whigham calls "giving a traditional dish a sense of place."
"That's the path I'm on — taking traditional dishes and making them ours,” he adds.
A plated portion of Casa Leo's paella, served with a side of aioli and topped with edible flowers and microgreens.
(
Casa Leo
)
For example: marmitako, a humble Basque fisherman's dish traditionally made with tuna and potato, with a base consisting of tomato, bell pepper, red onion and fish stock. Whigham noticed poblano peppers were "exploding at the market" and swapped them in for the green bell peppers, using the same process and proportions — resulting in a richer tone, more of a capsicum flavor and a "nice low-key heat." Paired with the chili de árbol spice, it made the dish "warmer and richer and a little deeper in flavor."
Less than two years in, Whigham says the Michelin recognition was a lovely surprise. "We weren't looking for it," he says. "This is what I do. I don't know how to do anything else but this."
Still, he feels the weight of its importance: "A good restaurant, you feel it — the pulse of it, the heartbeat. That's what I want for people."
Casa Leo
Location: 4500 Los Feliz Blvd., Suite C, Los Angeles
