Immigration Judge Reports — AsylumPublished: Jun 23, 2009 By: TRAC Source: My Source
This report card — following up on TRAC's 2006 and 2007 studies — is different. Its purpose is to see if the level of asylum disparity has changed. The study compares the asylum disparity rates that existed both before and after Attorney General Alberto Gonzales announced a Bush Administration plan in 2006 to improve the operations of the court. Accompanying this report are over 250 detailed reports providing the year-by-year record of individual Immigration Judges.
The central finding of TRAC's new report is that the judge-by-judge asylum disparities in the Immigration Courts are down. Among the fifteen immigration districts that decide the bulk of all asylum matters, the court data showed that disparity rates in ten of them have declined. This change in a significant number of busy districts does not mean that disparities have gone away. There were in fact, some districts where the disparities increased. But these findings indicate that the size of disparities have generally come down in magnitude. For example:
- Immigration Judges in New York City currently decide one out of every four asylum cases in the United States. In the three years before the AG's directive, the judge-by-judge differences in asylum decisions ranged from one judge who denied almost all (88%) matters to another who denied almost none (7%). In the last few years, this judge-by-judge variation was reduced by almost a quarter.
- In Miami, the second most active court, the reduction in judge-by-judge decision disparity was even larger. There the range among judges in their denial rates dropped almost two thirds from their previous levels.
TRAC found that the general improvement did not extend to every court. In fact, the data show that in a few Immigration Courts — for example in Cleveland and Orlando — the disparities had increased."
Click here to search for a specific Court or Immigration Judge to view their record on asylum.