India
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
46%
Asylum grant rate
of 54,865 decisions · FY1972–FY2026
95% interval: 46% — 47%
- granted:
- 25,403
- denied:
- 29,462
- other protection: withholding and the Convention Against Torture:
- 4
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
- India46% (54,865)
- 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
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 (1): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.
Show as a table
| Period | decisions | granted | 95% interval |
|---|---|---|---|
| FY2026partial | 4,355 | 5% | 5% — 6% |
| FY2025 | 5,252 | 36% | 35% — 37% |
| FY2024 | 4,381 | 61% | 60% — 63% |
| FY2023 | 4,801 | 66% | 65% — 67% |
| FY2022 | 3,766 | 67% | 66% — 69% |
| FY2021 | 1,362 | 70% | 68% — 72% |
| FY2020 | 2,690 | 63% | 61% — 64% |
| FY2019 | 3,637 | 62% | 61% — 64% |
| FY2018 | 1,705 | 59% | 57% — 62% |
| FY2017 | 816 | 63% | 60% — 66% |
| FY2016 | 580 | 62% | 58% — 66% |
| FY2015 | 570 | 59% | 55% — 63% |
| FY2014 | 726 | 57% | 54% — 61% |
| FY2013 | 618 | 57% | 53% — 61% |
| FY2012 | 601 | 46% | 42% — 50% |
| FY2011 | 576 | 45% | 41% — 49% |
| FY2010 | 451 | 52% | 47% — 56% |
| FY2009 | 473 | 54% | 49% — 58% |
| FY2008 | 534 | 50% | 46% — 54% |
| FY2007 | 729 | 49% | 46% — 53% |
| FY2006 | 906 | 50% | 46% — 53% |
| FY2005 | 819 | 38% | 35% — 41% |
| FY2004 | 1,063 | 42% | 39% — 45% |
| FY2003 | 1,545 | 39% | 36% — 41% |
| FY2002 | 1,049 | 47% | 44% — 50% |
| FY2001 | 1,011 | 50% | 47% — 53% |
| FY2000 | 1,200 | 43% | 40% — 46% |
| FY1999 | 1,440 | 28% | 26% — 31% |
| FY1998 | 1,228 | 26% | 23% — 28% |
| FY1997 | 1,000 | 29% | 27% — 32% |
| FY1996 | 1,401 | 26% | 24% — 29% |
| FY1995 | 1,140 | 16% | 14% — 19% |
| FY1994 | 769 | 16% | 14% — 19% |
| FY1993 | 528 | 23% | 20% — 27% |
| FY1992 | 633 | 24% | 20% — 27% |
| FY1991 | 90 | 21% | 14% — 31% |
| FY1990 | 55 | 35% | 23% — 48% |
| FY1989 | 69 | 25% | 16% — 36% |
| FY1988 | 78 | 6% | 3% — 14% |
| FY1987 | 105 | 4% | 1% — 9% |
| FY1986 | 82 | 1% | 0% — 7% |
| FY1985 | 28 | 7% | 2% — 23% |
| FY1984 | 3 | 0% | 0% — 56% |
Where these cases are heard
Courts by number of decisions for this nationality. Ordered by volume, not by percentage.
The queue
Proceedings of applicants of this nationality with no decision yet.
35 mo
already waited, median
from the NTA to the data cutoff
half of proceedings: 26—43 mo
proceedings in the queue: 100,357
- 78% 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.
| Judge | decisions | granted | 95% interval |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stockton, Bette Kane | 914 | 36% | 33% — 39% |
| Marks, Dana Leigh | 798 | 65% | 61% — 68% |
| Webber, Polly A. | 759 | 41% | 37% — 44% |
| King, Carol A. | 664 | 66% | 63% — 70% |
| Ramirez, Laura L. | 658 | 76% | 73% — 80% |
| Deiss, Ila C. | 658 | 92% | 90% — 94% |
| Phillips, Beverley M. | 642 | 58% | 54% — 62% |
| Costanzo, Lawrence Di | 620 | 52% | 48% — 56% |
| Phan-Quang, Tue | 555 | 55% | 51% — 59% |
| Hayward, Miriam | 548 | 76% | 72% — 79% |
| Greene III, Charles S. | 463 | 88% | 84% — 90% |
| Gonzalez, Alberto E. | 459 | 55% | 51% — 60% |
| Josephson, Kenneth | 457 | 67% | 62% — 71% |
| Savage, Patrick S. | 456 | 95% | 93% — 97% |
| Teeter, Marilyn J. | 445 | 40% | 36% — 45% |
| Simpson, Brian H. | 433 | 15% | 12% — 19% |
| Johnson, Jeremiah | 406 | 87% | 83% — 90% |
| Star, Shadee M. | 388 | 71% | 66% — 75% |
| Geisse, Loreto | 379 | 60% | 55% — 65% |
| Thompson, Donald W., JR. | 371 | 66% | 61% — 71% |
| Torres, Sarah F. | 361 | 48% | 43% — 53% |
| Swink, Arwen A. | 342 | 68% | 63% — 73% |
| Douchy, Evalyn P. | 337 | 74% | 69% — 79% |
| Rohan, Patricia A. | 334 | 24% | 20% — 29% |
| Nelson, Barbara A. | 322 | 28% | 24% — 33% |
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. India. EOIR Case Data, U.S. DOJ FOIA Library, release 2026-08, data through 2026-08-31. https://asylumbeacon.com/en/nationality/IN
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.