Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Sri Lanka

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

EOIR data through August 31, 2026 · built September 11, 2026 · What these dates mean

56%

Asylum grant rate

of 5,337 decisions · FY1984–FY2026

95% interval: 55% — 58%

granted:
3,014
denied:
2,323
other protection: withholding and the Convention Against Torture:
1

Withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture let a person stay, but grant no refugee status and no path to a green card. They are therefore excluded from the asylum grant rate and shown as a separate figure.

How this percentage is calculated

Grant rate = granted / (granted + denied). Administrative closures, withdrawals, abandonment and "not adjudicated" are excluded from the denominator. What is counted is a decision per proceeding, not per application: asylum, withholding and CAT protection are almost always asked for together, so withholding and CAT grants are counted separately from asylum. The U.S. fiscal year runs October 1 – September 30.

How this compares

  • Sri Lanka56% (5,337)
  • All U.S. courts33% (1,369,763)

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%198719982005201220192026

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

FY2026 is incomplete: the release covers only 11 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 (2): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY2026partial8518%11% — 27%
FY202515523%17% — 30%
FY20248754%44% — 64%
FY20238578%68% — 85%
FY202210070%60% — 78%
FY20217144%33% — 55%
FY202015949%41% — 57%
FY201917450%43% — 57%
FY201811161%52% — 70%
FY20177271%59% — 80%
FY20166562%49% — 72%
FY20157764%52% — 73%
FY201410381%72% — 87%
FY201315674%67% — 81%
FY201215868%60% — 75%
FY201118358%51% — 65%
FY201016168%61% — 75%
FY200916965%58% — 72%
FY200816652%45% — 60%
FY200714364%55% — 71%
FY200613264%56% — 72%
FY200514054%45% — 62%
FY200412849%41% — 58%
FY200318630%23% — 36%
FY200227451%45% — 57%
FY200130571%66% — 76%
FY200025068%62% — 74%
FY199926965%59% — 71%
FY199830275%70% — 79%
FY199717964%56% — 70%
FY199611438%29% — 47%
FY199510232%24% — 42%
FY19946554%42% — 65%
FY19933915%7% — 30%
FY19928235%26% — 46%
FY19913829%17% — 45%
FY19905538%27% — 51%
FY19898544%33% — 54%
FY19886635%24% — 47%
FY1987359%3% — 22%
FY1986729%8% — 64%
FY1985425%5% — 70%

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
New York Immigration Court1,47668%65% — 70%
West Los Angeles Immigration Court59354%50% — 58%
Elizabeth Immigration Court40077%73% — 81%
Napanoch Immigration Court33983%79% — 87%
San Francisco Immigration Court29181%76% — 85%
Newark Immigration Court20754%47% — 61%
Chicago Immigration Court17046%39% — 53%
New York Immigration Court11145%36% — 54%
Buffalo Immigration Court10825%18% — 34%
Miami Immigration Court10130%22% — 39%
Adelanto Immigration Court9834%25% — 43%
Baltimore Immigration Court9038%28% — 48%
Lumpkin Immigration Court6828%19% — 40%
Fort Snelling Immigration Court6545%33% — 57%
Annandale Immigration Court6552%40% — 64%
Tacoma Immigration Court6239%28% — 51%
Seattle Immigration Court6139%28% — 52%
Jena Immigration Court5718%10% — 29%
Los Fresnos Immigration Court5747%35% — 60%
Pearsall Immigration Court5636%24% — 49%
Dallas Immigration Court4434%22% — 49%
Philadelphia Immigration Court4388%76% — 95%
San Diego Immigration Court4326%15% — 40%
Boston Immigration Court4231%19% — 46%
Hartford Immigration Court4255%40% — 69%

The queue

Proceedings of applicants of this nationality with no decision yet.

32 mo

already waited, median

from the NTA to the data cutoff

half of proceedings: 11—80 mo

proceedings in the queue: 1,231

  • 80% of them 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 yet in the release. It is how long people have already waited, not how much longer they will.

How this is counted

Shown separately is the share with a hearing scheduled after the cutoff: the rest have no future event in the release at all, and cannot be read as live alongside these.

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
Abrams, Steven R.21885%80% — 89%
Tadal, Mirlande13479%71% — 85%
Livingston, Donn L.9789%81% — 94%
Sitgraves, D.D.9388%80% — 93%
Cabrera, Esmeralda8692%84% — 96%
Morace, Philip L.7076%65% — 84%
Chew, George T.6769%57% — 78%
Bain, Terry A.6594%85% — 98%
Rohan, Patricia A.6472%60% — 81%
Wyke, William Van5795%86% — 98%
Gordon-Uruakpa, Vivienne E.5686%74% — 93%
Nelson, Barbara A.5558%45% — 70%
Laforest, Brigitte5281%68% — 89%
Mathon, Lauren R.5277%64% — 86%
Sichel, Helen5184%72% — 92%
Ford, Rex J.5114%7% — 26%
Lamb, Elizabeth A.5096%87% — 99%
How to cite this page

Figures on this page belong to one monthly release and are replaced whole by the next. The release label and the data cutoff are part of the citation for that reason: without them the number cannot be checked later.

Asylum Beacon. Sri Lanka. EOIR Case Data, U.S. DOJ FOIA Library, release 2026-08, data through 2026-08-31. https://asylumbeacon.com/en/nationality/CE

Methodology in full

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 give legal advice. The release lags by roughly a month, so check ACIS or Respondent Access for your current case status. The source has known gaps, including among relief applications: if something is missing here, that does not mean it is missing from your case.