Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data
← All courts

EL PASO — IMMIGRATION COURT

EL PASO TX

22%

Asylum grant rate

of 4,955 decisions · FY1977–FY2026

95% interval: 21% — 23%

granted:
1,102
denied:
3,853
How this percentage is calculated
Grant rate = granted / (granted + denied). Administrative closures, withdrawals, abandonment and "not adjudicated" are excluded from the denominator. The unit of count is a decision per proceeding, not per application: applicants almost always file asylum, withholding and CAT protection together. Withholding and CAT grants are counted separately from asylum. U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

How this compares

  • EL PASO — IMMIGRATION COURT22% (4,955)
  • All U.S. courts33% (1,350,724)

This comparison does not adjust for which cases a judge was given: judges see different nationalities, different shares of detained respondents, and different rates of legal representation. A difference in percentages does not by itself mean identical cases were treated differently.

Trend by fiscal year

0%25%50%75%100%198519962003201220192026

U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

FY2026 is incomplete: the release covers only 10 of its 12 months. Its point is drawn hollow and the segment leading to it is dashed.

Years with fewer than 10 decisions are not plotted (5): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY2026partial6853%2% — 5%
FY20251,1939%7% — 11%
FY202454833%29% — 37%
FY202349843%38% — 47%
FY202230442%37% — 48%
FY202116150%42% — 57%
FY202026518%14% — 24%
FY201921714%10% — 19%
FY2018789%4% — 17%
FY20175012%6% — 24%
FY2016186%1% — 26%
FY20153231%18% — 49%
FY2014730%0% — 5%
FY2013250%0% — 13%
FY20121513%4% — 38%
FY20111010%2% — 40%
FY201050%0% — 43%
FY200980%0% — 32%
FY20081338%18% — 64%
FY20071650%28% — 72%
FY20062928%15% — 46%
FY20052317%7% — 37%
FY20043123%11% — 40%
FY20034929%18% — 42%
FY20022631%17% — 50%
FY20011656%33% — 77%
FY20003757%41% — 71%
FY19993155%38% — 71%
FY19983741%26% — 57%
FY19973735%22% — 51%
FY19963471%54% — 83%
FY19953263%45% — 77%
FY19942218%7% — 39%
FY1993229%3% — 28%
FY19921414%4% — 40%
FY19913047%30% — 64%
FY19903142%26% — 59%
FY19891520%7% — 45%
FY19884941%28% — 55%
FY19876928%18% — 39%
FY19867221%13% — 32%
FY1985234%1% — 21%
FY198490%0% — 30%
FY198320%0% — 66%
FY198210%0% — 79%

How long a case takes

From service of the NTA to the decision on the application, across all judges of this court.

18 mo

median

half of cases: 10—27 mo

based on 4,955 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY202668526 mo19—31
FY20251,19319 mo15—25
FY202454819 mo10—25
FY202349816 mo11—25
FY20223047 mo4—11
FY202116118 mo15—22
FY20202657 mo5—9
FY201921737 mo12—55
FY20187849 mo29—60
FY20175033 mo21—48

Duration runs from the NTA date (charging document served) to the decision on the application. Median, not mean: the distribution has a long right tail. Cases decided this year may have begun a decade ago, so duration by year of decision is not a forecast for a case filed today.

The queue

Cases at this court with no decision yet.

7,767
cases waiting
42 mo
already waited, median
  • Half have waited between 22 mo and 79 mo.
  • 7,180 (92%) have a hearing scheduled later than the date this data was collected. The rest have no upcoming event in the release.

The queue counts proceedings with no decision in the release. The figure runs from the NTA date to the release cutoff — it is how long people have already waited, not how much longer they will. Shown separately: how many have a hearing scheduled after the cutoff. The rest have no upcoming event in the release and should not be read alongside live cases.

Judges of this court

Showing judges with at least 50 asylum decisions at this court.

0%25%50%75%100%Burkholder, Gary D.: 9%, n=2031Miller, Jr. James J.: 13%, n=859Nail, William F., JR.: 7%, n=458Allen, Janette L.: 42%, n=424Razo, Danny: 18%, n=368Herbert, Nathan L.: 16%, n=364Bonilla, Judith F.: 35%, n=342Smith, Penny M.: 16%, n=340Hough, Robert S.: 15%, n=312Erwin, R. Lee: 27%, n=309Holguin, Enrique A.: 8%, n=299Spiegel, Martin F.: 22%, n=236Paredes Velasco, Adrian F.: 33%, n=194Hartnett, Sarah: 41%, n=169WEW: 10%, n=98Myers, Kyle: 8%, n=631003001000Decisions

Horizontally, how many decisions a judge issued; vertically, their grant rate. The band shows how much spread is explained by sample size alone.

Inside the band: the difference is not supported by a sample of that size.

Outside the band: the difference is larger than chance explains.

Hearing cases now — 9

U.S. immigration judges: volume and asylum grant rate
JudgeDecisionsGranted95% interval
Miller, Jr. James J.85913%11% — 15%
Allen, Janette L.42442%38% — 47%
Razo, Danny36818%14% — 22%
Herbert, Nathan L.36416%13% — 21%
Bonilla, Judith F.34235%31% — 41%
Holguin, Enrique A.2998%5% — 11%
Paredes Velasco, Adrian F.19433%27% — 40%
Hartnett, Sarahnothing scheduled16941%34% — 48%
Myers, Kyle638%3% — 17%

Worked here before — 7

They have no hearings scheduled anywhere after the release cutoff. Their rates remain in the court's statistics — the decisions were made — but for someone holding a notice they are no longer about their case.

U.S. immigration judges: volume and asylum grant rate
JudgeDecisionsGranted95% interval
Burkholder, Gary D.not hearing cases2,0319%8% — 10%
Nail, William F., JR.not hearing cases4587%5% — 9%
Smith, Penny M.not hearing cases34016%13% — 20%
Hough, Robert S.nothing scheduled31215%12% — 19%
Erwin, R. Leenot hearing cases30927%22% — 32%
Spiegel, Martin F.not hearing cases23622%17% — 28%
Code WEW, name missing from the lookup tablenot hearing cases9810%6% — 18%

Status is derived from the court calendar: whether the judge has hearings scheduled after the release cutoff. The EOIR release carries no personnel data, so retirement, removal, elevation to the BIA and extended absence cannot be told apart — only what the data shows is stated here. Hearings are scheduled two to three years out, so an empty calendar for a working judge is rare; for judges who went quiet in the last few months it may still be an artifact of the cutoff, which lags by about a month. The lookup table's "active" flag is not used: it disagrees with the calendar for a third of judges.

Data comes from the monthly EOIR Case Data release (U.S. DOJ FOIA Library). This service is not affiliated with the U.S. government and does not provide legal advice. The data lags by roughly a month; for current case status use ACIS and Respondent Access. The source is known to have missing records, including relief applications — absent data does not mean it is absent from your case.