We need faster adjudication of asylum claims, to avoid internally releasing illegal aliens who may not qualify for asylum.  I have come up with a plan that can help: temporary judges to hear the asylum claims. 

Requirements for such judges would depend somewhat on whether these would be federal or state judges, but I imagine federal is most likely (since Ariz. was sued by the feds for daring to enforce immigration law).  While a bachelor's degree is all that is required for "limited-jurisdiction judges in most states," federal judges are generally required to be lawyers.  On the other hand, candidates for the Supreme Court need only to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate (which is more likely if they have legal experience).

It is also true that judges typically hear all sorts of cases, while I am suggesting that these temporary judges hear asylum claims only.  It shouldn't be very different from determining if someone is eligible for welfare: check the law, check the testimony of the claimant, see if the facts align and whether the story is believable.  All applicants for asylum should have a DNA sample taken, and it should be run through the federal and state criminal databases to discover if this individual is wanted for crimes or has previously been caught illegally crossing.

The responsibility and effect of the judge could be further restricted such that asylees have a temporary status.  The asylum temporary judges would be performing triage to weed out the worst and least effective liars, with a more definitive determination made by a fully qualified judge at a later date.  Rejected applicants would be immediately transported back across the border they crossed.  Don't call it "deportation," since they weren't admitted in the first place.

Other cost savings are possible.  Judges should be able to telecommute, similar to how telemedicine is done by medical doctors.  An asylum judge could thus work from home.  Salary requirements could be kept low since expenses would be minimal.  Doubtless, there are many people on Social Security who would like to make a few extra bucks and help keep the country safe by weeding out invalid asylum claims — e.g., MS-13 members or people who have already sneaked into the country multiple times.

If the average citizen can be expected to serve on a jury, then I see no moral or ethical problem with someone being in effect a jury of one, tasked with determining whether or not a defendant is lying or simply doesn't meet the qualifications for asylum to be granted.

Current policy may not make this plan easy.  Would Trump be making the appointments, and would Senate confirmation be required, since the jobs are temporary?  I have the impression that the president can appoint temporary officeholders for various positions.  Would the appointees be required to have law degrees?  They aren't to be tasked with deciding fine points of law, just evaluating the veracity of the asylum claim.

If we are to avoid caging children and facilitating murders of people the elite don't care about, something has to be done.