Judge and court statistics
Asylum grant rates shown with the number of decisions behind them and the statistical margin, trends by year, a breakdown by applicant nationality, and what became of appeals to the BIA.
Grant rates by judge and court, trends by year, appeal outcomes — and, separately, a way to find your own record with its hearing history.
EOIR data through August 31, 2026 · built September 11, 2026 · What these dates mean
Asylum grant rates shown with the number of decisions behind them and the statistical margin, trends by year, a breakdown by applicant nationality, and what became of appeals to the BIA.
The source contains no names and no A-numbers: a record is found by matching several attributes. Hearing history, decoded adjournment reasons, and an asylum clock estimate.
Of the 1,270 judges with enough decisions in this release, not all have hearings scheduled after August 31, 2026. The grant rate of a judge you can no longer be assigned to is about the past, not about your case.
What is shown is not the change in the rate itself but how far it departs from the national shift: moving the same way as everyone else, only by less, is a deviation too. A deviation does not explain its cause: courts differ in case mix, applicant nationalities and detained share.
Two twelve-month windows are compared, and both end before the release cutoff: the last month of a release is always undercounted and is left out. A gap of more than two standard errors counts as significant.
Otay Mesa Immigration Court: “Vacated master calendar hearing” is the reason behind 0.0050% of adjournments, against 4.8% nationwide.
Adjournments: 20,124 · interval 0.00088% — 0.028%Window: September 2025 — August 2026.
Santa Ana Immigration Court: 0% of cases with a date set have their next hearing more than two years out, against 9.6% nationwide.
Cases with a date set: 19,907 · interval 0% — 0.019%As of August 31, 2026.
The “Pulled Case” program: 0% of proceedings finish within a year, against 47.7% expected from its case mix.
Proceedings with a known date: 35,305 · interval 0% — 0.011%Coverage: October 2018 — August 2026.
Houston Immigration Court: 0.2% of decided appeals go to a three-member BIA panel, against 4.1% nationwide.
Appeals decided: 870 · interval 0.063% — 0.8%Window: September 2025 — August 2026.
Pearsall Immigration Court: the asylum grant rate went 2.9% → 6.1%, and that shift diverges from the nationwide one.
Asylum decisions in the recent window: 1,123 · interval 4.8% — 7.6%Windows: August 2024 — July 2025 and August 2025 — July 2026.
Nepal: 77.3% of completed proceedings had a representative, against 47.1% expected at the nationwide case mix.
Completed proceedings: 19,993 · interval 76.7% — 77.9%Coverage: October 2016 — August 2026.
Cleveland Immigration Court: 3.0% of second rounds after a BIA remand end in relief, against 17.5% nationwide.
Second rounds completed: 676 · interval 1.9% — 4.5%Window: October 2021 — August 2026.
The selection is made by a filter, not an editor: only gaps wider than two standard errors, and only at sufficient volume, get in. A gap does not explain its cause: courts differ in case mix, applicant nationalities and detained share.
A court's, nationality's or program's share is compared with the share it belongs against: the nationwide share over the same window, or the expectation computed from that entity's own case mix. Each topic contributes one line, and what earlier releases already showed is discounted — otherwise the selection would repeat month after month. Every line carries its own window, and it is labelled: a twelve-month window and a snapshot on the cutoff day sit side by side and are otherwise indistinguishable.
In the 12 months before August 31, 2026, EOIR created 407 new judge records. There is no grant rate to show for them yet — too few decisions — but who they are and where they sit is already known.
The date in each row is the day the judge's record was created in EOIR's system — the only date of a judge's appearance the release carries. It is not an appointment date and may predate or postdate the start of work; 317 records were created on a single day when the system was migrated in 2003. The court comes from the past year's hearing calendar, or, for judges not on it yet, from EOIR's court-assignment roster when that roster lists exactly one court.
Two things are visible straight from the calendar: a judge now sits at a different court, and a court has stopped scheduling hearings. Neither follows from the profile pages — those show the current state, not that it changed.
62 judges changed courts of 684 who can be compared with a year ago
2 courts are scheduling no hearings of 90 courts with a calendar
Both figures come from the court calendar, not from the lookup table: the "active" flag is as unreliable for courts as it is for judges. A court with no future hearings may have closed, merged, changed code or moved its docket — the release cannot tell these apart, so only the observation is stated. A judge's move is measured across non-overlapping windows: where they heard cases a year ago, and where hearings are scheduled after the cutoff.
All judges and their courts →What changed between releases →