Judges

Judge Roulette

Among 1,409 immigration judges in our data, grant rates range from 0% to 44.9%. Your assigned judge may be the single strongest predictor of whether you stay or get deported.

The Gap Is Enormous

Immigration law doesn't change from one courtroom to the next. The legal standard for asylum is the same whether you're in New York or Houston. Yet outcomes vary wildly by judge.

Among judges with at least 500 decisions: 17 judges have grant rates above 30%, while 378 judges have grant rates below 3%. The highest grant rate belongs to Judge Morace, Philip L. at 44.9% across 15,819 decisions.

Highest Grant Rate Judges (500+ decisions)

JudgeDecisionsGrant RateGrants
Morace, Philip L.15,81944.9%7,097
Coleman, Sandra S.4,66144.4%2,070
Bain, Terry A.18,53643.8%8,113
Brennan, Noel A.17,03842.2%7,193
Chew, George T.15,37641.6%6,394
Griswold, Stephen S.3,67339.1%1,435
Lamb, Elizabeth A.14,99239%5,845
Mcmanus, Margaret18,60137.9%7,054
Gonzalez, Alberto E.5,81536.9%2,143
Laforest, Brigitte20,58136.3%7,467

Lowest Grant Rate Judges (500+ decisions)

JudgeDecisionsGrant RateRemovals
Iad Judge35,8650%0
Garten, Danielle H.4,0240%0
Visiting Judge 102,7190%0
Lucic, Nicholas B.6190%0
Mam5870%1
New Ij #64,1950.1%2
Garcia, Emmanuel3,7800.1%1
Miller, Jane Chace.2,0970.1%0
Visiting Judge 91,8390.1%1
Brown, Jefferson1,8070.1%17

Why It Happens

Several structural factors drive this variation:

  • No jury, no panel: Unlike federal courts, immigration courts use a single judge with broad discretion. There's no jury to moderate individual tendencies and no panel of judges to provide checks on outlier decisions.
  • Subjective credibility determinations: Asylum cases hinge on whether the judge believes the applicant. This is inherently subjective — one judge may find testimony credible while another would not, given identical facts.
  • Political appointment cycles: Immigration judges are DOJ employees hired by the Attorney General. Different administrations prioritize different judicial philosophies, creating cohorts of judges with systematically different approaches.
  • Caseload pressure: With an average of 9,132 proceedings per judge in our dataset, the pressure to move cases quickly can affect how thoroughly each case is reviewed.

What This Means in Practice

An asylum seeker assigned to a judge with a 44.9% grant rate has a fundamentally different future than one assigned to a judge with a 0% grant rate. Same law. Same evidence standard. Dramatically different odds of survival.

This "refugee roulette" — as legal scholars call it — raises serious due process concerns. In what other area of law does a random judicial assignment produce a 40+ percentage point swing in outcomes?

💡

The Distribution

  • 17 judges grant relief in 30%+ of cases
  • 378 judges grant relief in fewer than 3% of cases
  • → The average judge has made 9,132 decisions
  • → Grant rate variation persists even within the same courthouse
Share: