Refugee Roulette:Disparities in Asylum

Adjudication

Profs. Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew Schoenholtz

and Philip G. Schrag

Affirmative Asylum Applications

Size of DatabasesDatabase Number of Asylum

CasesAsylum Office Decisions,

FY 1999-2005

130,000 (900 asylum officers)

Immigration Court Decisions, Jan. 2000 through August 2004

140,000 (225 judges)

BIA Asylum Decisions, FY 1998-2005

101,000

US Courts of Appeals Decisions, Calendar Years 2004 and 2005

4215

The 15 Asylee-producing Countries (APCs)

• Albania• Armenia• Cameroon• China• Colombia• Ethiopia• Guinea*• Haiti

• India• Liberia• Mauritania*• Pakistan• Russia• Togo*• Venezuela*

* Not included in Asylum Office Studies

Our Benchmark for Measuring Disparity

For the data set in question (as defined for each study), did an adjudicator render a decision favorable to the asylum applicant at a rate that was either more than 50% higher or more than 50% lower than the rate of such decisions by adjudicators from the same office?

Regional Asylum Offices

Asylum Office Regions A and H Grant Rates in APC Cases (Officers with At

Least 50 APC Cases)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 31

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53

Deviations from Region A Mean for Strong Claim (APC) Countries

(2 of 31 officers deviate from the office mean by more than 50%)

-50%

-25%

0%

25%

50%

75%

Deviations from Region H Mean for Strong Claim (APC) Countries

(27 of 53 Officers deviate by more than 50%)

-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53

Grant Rates and Percentage of Officers (with at Least 50 cases) who Deviate by More

than 50% from Regional APC Rates[N = 132,754 cases]

Region APC Grant Rate

Percentage of Officers who Deviate from Regional APC Grant Rate by More than 50%

D 62% 2%

A 35% 6%

C 56% 9%

B 39% 11%

E 26% 18%

F 52% 22%

G 38% 35%

H 27% 51%

Asylum Officer Regions, Single Country Charts

Grant Rates and Deviations from Regional One-Country Means, Officers with At Least 25 Cases

China

Region C – Grant Rates (China)Region C, China Grant Rates, Officers with 25+ cases

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Region C – Officers’ Deviations from Regional China Mean (3/42 Deviate by

More than 50%)

-90%

-80%

-70%

-60%

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Region E – Grant RatesRegion E, Grant Rates, China

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57

Region E (which shows less consistency in Chinese adjudications than Region C). Officers’

Deviations from Regional China Mean (17/57 Deviate by More than 50%)

-120%-110%-100%-90%-80%-70%-60%-50%-40%-30%-20%-10%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%110%120%130%140%150%160%170%180%190%200%210%220%230%240%250%260%270%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Some Regions Have Much Less Consistency Among

Asylum Officers

Region H – Grant Rates - China

Grant Rates, China, Region H, Officers with 25+ Cases

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51

Region H – Officers’ Deviations from Regional China Mean

-150%

-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

350%

400%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52

Grant Rates in China Cases, By Asylum Office Region

[N = 38,748 cases]

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

A B C D E F G H

Percentage of Officers Deviating from Regional China Mean Grant Rates, By Region, Officers with At Least 50

China Cases (Regions B and D Did Not Have Enough Such Officers to Chart) [N = 37,909 cases]

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

A

C

E

F

G

H

China Grant Rates: All 146 officers who had at least 100 adjudications

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96 101 106 111 116 121 126 131 136 141 146

And It’s Not Just China…

Region C – India – Grant Rates

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Region C – India – 15 of 39 Officers Deviate by More than 50%

-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

The Immigration Courts

Grant Rates for APC Cases, 2000-2004, in Immigration Courts with More than 1500 Asylum Cases

37%

12%

41%40% 38%

37%

19%

37%

41% 40%

23%

52%

42%

49%

39%

30%

54%

40%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Arlin

gto

n (

1349)

Atlanta

(687)

Baltim

ore

(2304)

Bosto

n (

1440)

Chic

ago (

1663)

Dalla

s (

560)

Detr

oit (

1462)

Housto

n (

796)

Los A

ngele

s (

6819)

Mem

phis

(1049)

Mia

mi (1

9,4

02)

New

York

(27,9

42)

New

ark

(2392)

Orlando (

2974)

Phila

delp

hia

(1512)

San D

iego (

449)

San F

rancis

co (

5659)

TO

TA

L (

78,4

59)

Grant Rates of New York Immigration Judges, APC Cases,

Judges with at Least 100 APC Cases

6%7%

11%

17%19%

23%

27%27%28%29%

37%

45%45%47%

50%52%

55%

60%62%63%

66%

69%69%69%71%

74%76%

77%80%

89%91%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

New York Immigration Court Judges’ Deviations from the New York Mean, APC Cases, Judges with

100 or More APC Cases

(9 of 31 judges deviate by more than 50%)

-100%

-90%-80%

-70%-60%

-50%-40%

-30%

-20%-10%

0%10%

20%

30%40%

50%60%

70%80%

90%

Albanian Cases: New York Immigration Court Grant Rates, Judges with at least 50 Albanian

Cases 2000-2004 (2173 cases)

5%

25%

31%

47% 48%

53%

58%62% 64%

67%71% 71% 71% 73%

82% 83%

91% 92% 92% 93%96%

67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

110%

New York Immigration Court Judges’ Deviations from the New York Mean for Albanian Cases

-100%

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Indian Cases: San Francisco Immigration Court Grant Rates, Judges with at least 50 Indian

Cases 2000-2004 (3114 cases)

3%

8%

18%21%

35%

42%

48%50%

52% 53% 55% 56% 56%

63%66%

71%73%

84%

52%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

1 (58)

2 (110)

3 (84)

4 (153)

5 (188)

6 (143)

7 (151)

8 (50)

9 (221)

10 (146)

11 (276)

12 (225)

13 (252)

14 (189)

15 (185)

16 (217)

17 (263)

18 (203)

CourtMean(3198)

San Francisco Immigration Court Judges’ Deviations from the San Francisco Mean

for Indian Cases (3114 Cases)

-93%

-84%

-66%-60%

-34%

-19%

-8%-4%

1% 3% 5% 7% 7%

21%27%

37%40%

61%

-110%

-100%

-90%

-80%

-70%

-60%

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Chinese Cases: Los Angeles Immigration Court Grant Rates, Judges with at least 50 Chinese

Cases 2000-2004 (2579 cases)

9%12% 13%

16% 16%19%

26%30% 30% 31% 32%

34% 34%

41% 42%

50% 51%

60% 60% 62% 62%

81%

36%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

1 (1

17)

2 (

68)

3 (1

37)

4 (

81)

5 (

62)

6 (1

56)

7 (1

89)

8 (1

24)

9 (

76)

10 (9

6)

11 (2

71)

12 (1

59)

13 (7

6)

14 (1

58)

15 (1

03)

16 (7

8)

17 (9

9)

18 (9

9)

19 (5

8)

20 (1

36)

21 (1

18)

22 (1

18)

Court M

ean (2

745)

Los Angeles Immigration Court Judges’ Deviations from the Los Angeles Mean for Chinese Cases

-90%

-80%-70%

-60%-50%

-40%-30%

-20%

-10%0%

10%20%

30%40%

50%60%

70%

80%90%

100%110%

120%130%

140%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Colombian Cases: Miami Immigration Court Grant Rates, Judges with at least 50 Colombian

Cases 2000-2004 (8214 cases)

5% 6% 7%11% 13% 13%

15% 16%18% 19% 21% 21%

25% 25%

34% 35%39%

46%49%

58%

77%

88%

30%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 (4

26)

2 (1

62)

3 (3

82)

4 (3

86)

5 (2

55)

6 (4

37)

7 (2

73)

8 (5

19)

9 (3

21)

10 (3

93)

11 (3

99)

12 (3

70)

13 (3

26)

14 (3

62)

15 (4

43)

16 (3

50)

17 (5

00)

18 (5

41)

19 (2

06)

20 (2

79)

21 (5

50)

22 (3

34)

Cour

t Mea

n(8

265)

Miami Immigration Court Judges’ Deviations from the Miami Mean for Colombian Cases

-84% -82% -77%

-65%-58% -57%

-49% -47%-39% -37%

-30% -29%-19% -18%

13% 15%

30%

54%63%

93%

155%

193%

-100%-90%-80%-70%-60%-50%-40%-30%-20%-10%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%110%120%130%140%150%160%170%180%190%200%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Effect of Representation on Grant Rate

16.30%

45.60%

89%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Unrepresented Represented Represented byGeorgetown

University's Clinic

Effect of Dependents on Grant Rates

42.3%

48.2%

38%

40%

42%

44%

46%

48%

50%

No Dependents One Dependent

Effect of Judge's Gender on Grant Rates

53.8%

37.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

78 Female Judges 169 Male Judges

Effect of Prior Work Experience on Grant Rates

39.6% 38.9% 37.4%

55.4%52.3%

46.3%47.1% 48.2%44.2%

41.1%43.2%

39.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Experience No Experience

Effect of Prior INS/DHS Experience on Grant Rates

47.9%43.7%

40.7%

30.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

No experience 1 to 5 Years 6 to 10 years 11 or more years

Grant Rates by Gender and Prior Work Experience

33.940.5

35.339.6

43.236.5

49.8

56.8

46.1

59.464

49.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

GovernmentExperience

NoGovernmentExperience

DHS/INSExperience

No DHS/INSExperience

NGOExperience

No NGOExperience

Male Judge Female Judge

Grant Rate by Gender, Representation, and DHS/INS Experience

41.837.7

14.3 14.3

60.6

48.5

31.4

13.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Representation andNo DHS/INSExperience

Representation andINS/DHS Experience

No Representationand No DHS/INS

Experience

No Representationand DHS/INSExperience

Male judge Female judge

The Board of Immigration Appeals

All Immigration Cases Appealed from Board of Immigration Appeals to Federal

Courts of Appeals

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2002 2003

Percent of cases with panel opinions Percent of cases remanded by Board

1000

. . . . .Cases/month appealed to circuits

Appeals to US courts

800

600

400

200

Percentage of BIA Asylum Decisions Favorable to Applicants, By Type of Decision, FY 98-00 and FY 03-05

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

FY 98 FY99 FY00 FY 03 FY 04 FY05

Single member with short opinion

Affirmance without opinion

Single member (AWO + shortopinions)All asylum decisions

BIA Asylum Grants and Remands as a Percentage of all Cases (Excludes Cases Coded by BIA as Not

Favoring Either Applicant or Government)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

BIA Grants and Remands, Showing Representation (N = 9365 Appeals)

0%

5%10%

15%20%

25%30%

35%40%

45%

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Unrepresented All cases Represented

The Drop in the Rate of BIA Decisions Favorable to Asylum Applicants from APCs

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2005

All APC cases (15 countries) APC represented cases

The Drop in Rate of Decisions Favorable to Asylum Applicants from Individual APCs, FY 2001 vs. 2002

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

FY 2001

FY 2002

The U.S. Courts of Appeals

Rate of Votes to Remand in Asylum Cases, 3d Cir Judges with at least 25 Cases,

2004-05 (N=784 votes cast)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Individual Judges’ Deviations from 12% Circuit Mean Rate of Votes to Remand,

3d Cir., 2004-05 (Judges with 25 or More Votes)(Only 1 of 16 Judges Deviates from Circuit Mean by More than 50%)

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

3d Circuit Remand Vote Rates by Party of

Appointing President, 25+ cases

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Rep. appointees (12%)

Dem. appointees (12%)

Rate of Votes to Remand in Asylum Cases, 6th Cir Judges with at least 23 Cases,

2004-05 (N=385 votes cast)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Individual Judges’ Deviations from 11.4% Circuit Mean Rate of Votes to Remand,

6th Cir., 2004-05 (Judges with 23 or More Votes)(7 of 13 Judges Deviate from Circuit Mean by More than 50%)

-150%

-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

6th Circuit Remand Vote Rates

by Party of Appointing President, 23+ cases

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Democratic appointees 14.6%

Republican appointees 9.3%Rep. Presiden

Remand Rates by Circuits, all 4215 asylum appeals, 2004-05

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

2004 10.30% 10% 7.10% 1.40% 4.30% 8.70% 33.90% 14.10% 18.30% 8.80% 4.40% 14.40%

2005 14.50% 17.60% 14.30% 2.40% 3.80% 16.50% 37.70% 7% 20.90% 9.40% 2.60% 16.40%

2004-05 12.80% 17.10% 10.90% 1.90% 4.10% 12.70% 36.10% 11.30% 19.50% 9.10% 3.80% 15.40%

1st 2d 3d 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th ALL

Federal Courts of Appeals Votes to Reverse and/or Remand

(Asylum Cases in Red, Civil Cases in Blue) (Prisoner Cases Excluded)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

4th

11

th

5th

8th

10

th

1st

3d

6th 2d

9th

7th

4th

11

th

5th

8th

10

th

1st

3d

6th 2d

9th

7th

Federal Appeals Circuit

Remand Rates by Circuits, the 2361 asylum appeals from “asylee-producing

countries,” 2004-05

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

1st(39)

2d(363)

3d(185)

4th(161)

5th(73)

6th(131)

7th(77)

8th(54)

9th(1100)

10th(22)

11th(156)

ALL(2361)