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

BOLIVIA

Asylum decisions for applicants of this nationality across all U.S. immigration courts.

14%

Asylum grant rate

of 2,656 decisions · FY1972–FY2026

95% interval: 13% — 16%

granted:
378
denied:
2,278
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

  • BOLIVIA14% (2,656)
  • 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%198719982004201220202026

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 (11): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY2026partial1,0095%3% — 6%
FY202584214%11% — 16%
FY202418325%19% — 31%
FY20234726%15% — 40%
FY20221267%39% — 86%
FY20211020%6% — 51%
FY20201020%6% — 51%
FY20192255%35% — 73%
FY20181338%18% — 64%
FY20171020%6% — 51%
FY2016813%2% — 47%
FY2015729%8% — 64%
FY20141225%9% — 53%
FY20131338%18% — 64%
FY20121844%25% — 66%
FY20111625%10% — 49%
FY20101547%25% — 70%
FY2009119%2% — 38%
FY2008967%35% — 88%
FY20071619%7% — 43%
FY2006650%19% — 81%
FY20051921%9% — 43%
FY20042726%13% — 45%
FY20031638%18% — 61%
FY20021010%2% — 40%
FY20011479%52% — 92%
FY2000180%0% — 18%
FY1999120%0% — 24%
FY19982737%22% — 56%
FY19974333%20% — 47%
FY19965525%16% — 38%
FY19953424%12% — 40%
FY19941421%8% — 48%
FY1993714%3% — 51%
FY199260%0% — 39%
FY199150%0% — 43%
FY19901513%4% — 38%
FY1989714%3% — 51%
FY1988200%0% — 16%
FY19871145%21% — 72%
FY198630%0% — 56%
FY198530%0% — 56%
FY197510%0% — 79%

Representation

"Represented" means a respondent's representative was on record no later than the decision date. The release contains no representative names. The gap between represented and unrepresented reflects both quality of counsel and which cases find counsel at all — it does not follow that counsel raises the odds by exactly this much.

  • Represented15% (2,039)
  • Unrepresented11% (617)

Custody

Custody and detention fields are not sourced from EOIR but from DHS — the release's own Readme says so. This breakdown shows the composition of the judge's docket, not the judge's treatment of detained people.

  • Never detained14% (2,244)
  • Released24% (247)
  • Detained7% (165)

The queue

Applicants of this nationality with no decision yet.

5,866
cases waiting
27 mo
already waited, median
  • Half have waited between 19 mo and 32 mo.
  • 5,367 (91%) 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.

Where these cases are heard

Courts by number of decisions for this nationality. Ordered by volume, not by percentage.

Where these cases are heard
Courtdecisionsgranted95% interval
ANNANDALE — IMMIGRATION COURT1,2429%7% — 11%
ANNANDALE — IMMIGRATION COURT38129%24% — 33%
STERLING — STERLING2436%3% — 9%
HYATTSVILLE — IMMIGRATION COURT1287%4% — 13%
MIAMI — IMMIGRATION COURT7628%19% — 39%
BALTIMORE — IMMIGRATION COURT5424%15% — 37%
LOS ANGELES — WEST LOS ANGELES IMMIGRATION COURT449%4% — 21%
BOSTON — IMMIGRATION COURT4030%18% — 45%
NEW YORK — IMMIGRATION COURT3824%13% — 39%
SEATTLE — IMMIGRATION COURT3514%6% — 29%
NEW ORLEANS — IMMIGRATION COURT2532%17% — 52%
SAN FRANCISCO — IMMIGRATION COURT1953%32% — 73%
Orlando — IMMIGRATION COURT1974%51% — 88%
SANTA ANA — IMMIGRATION COURT186%1% — 26%
NEWARK — IMMIGRATION COURT1724%10% — 47%
MIAMI — IMMIGRATION COURT1712%3% — 34%
OAKDALE — IMMIGRATION COURT1619%7% — 43%
OTERO — IMMIGRATION COURT1513%4% — 38%
SAN ANTONIO — IMMIGRATION COURT1225%9% — 53%
CHICAGO — IMMIGRATION COURT1182%52% — 95%
BUFFALO — IMMIGRATION COURT1118%5% — 48%
HOUSTON — IMMIGRATION COURT1010%2% — 40%
CHARLOTTE — IMMIGRATION COURT911%2% — 44%
EL PASO — IMMIGRATION COURT813%2% — 47%
NEW YORK — IMMIGRATION COURT714%3% — 51%

Judges with the most such cases

At least 50 decisions for this nationality. This is not a ranking: judges hear different mixes of cases even within one country.

Judges with the most such cases
Judgedecisionsgranted95% interval
Campanella, Lorianne1416%3% — 12%
Farrar-Crockett, Emily1104%1% — 9%
Pratt, Sherease R.1013%1% — 8%
Mendez, Francisco824%1% — 10%
Nadkarni, Deepali638%3% — 17%
Torg, Cynthia Shepherd5321%12% — 33%
Vanveldhuisen, Richard W.5110%4% — 21%
Bryant, John Milo5038%26% — 52%
Petit, Anam Rahman.5028%17% — 42%

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.