In this updated series, the widest difference between asylum denial rates was found in the San Francisco Immigration Court. There the range between the judge with the highest denial rate (91.6%) and the lowest denial rate (1.3%) was over 90 percentage points. The New York Immigration Court was right behind with a range of 89 percentage points, followed by the Arlington and Sacramento Immigration Courts each with a range of 86 percentage points. Two additional Immigration Courts had ranges of 80 percentage points or higher. These were the Newark Immigration Court (range of 83) and the Boston Immigration Court (range of 80).

It is also the case that larger differences among judges at the same Immigration Court tend to be found where the Court has more judges. More judges, each with their own background, experiences and judicial philosophy they bring to the bench, increase the odds that some judges will be appointed with differing views. However, this correlation of Court size and differences in denial range only extends to a certain point. For example, the El Paso and Tucson Immigration Courts each had five judges deciding asylum cases but very different judge-to-judge agreement patterns. Historically, San Francisco has had much higher disparity than its neighbor to the south, Los Angeles.

To grant or deny an asylum application is among the most consequential decisions an Immigration Judge makes. For this reason, understanding how asylum decisions vary across time, across courts, and across judges warrants more attention. The lessons that are evident from past decades should not be ignored. For many asylum seekers our current system has not delivered a fast and fair resolution of their cases. Often it has delivered neither.