define-term in pattern position

I usually think of any term being allowed in pattern position and simply acting as "unify with this".

I think of define-term as simply introducing a meta-variable that means literally the term being defined.

However, both of these mental models are broken when combined:

(require redex/reduction-semantics)
(define-language L)
(define-term T true)
> (redex-match? L true (term T))
#t
> (redex-match? L T (term true))
#f
> (define-judgment-form L
    #:mode (eval I O)
    [(eval true true)])
> (judgment-holds (eval T true))
#t
> (judgment-holds (eval T T))
#f

Is there a reason? Could this be supported?

Start with the interaction among define-term, redex-match?, define-judgment-form, and judgment-holds shown in the examples. Determine why the two pattern cases differ and define what supported define-term behavior in pattern position should mean; done requires an agreed behavior for both examples.