Judge Javier E. Balasquide

FY 2017 - 2022, Miami Immigration Court

Published Oct 26, 2022

Javier E. Balasquide was appointed as an immigration judge in July 2006. He received a bachelor of arts degree in 1988 from the University of Delaware and a juris doctorate in 1991 from the Interamerican University School of Law. From March 2003 to July 2006, Judge Balasquide served as chief counsel at Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, in Arlington, Va. From February 1999 to March 2003, he served at the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) in Arlington and Falls Church, Va., in various capacities: from June 2002 to March 2003, as district counsel; from September 2000 to June 2002, as appellate counsel; and from February 1999 to September 2000, as assistant district counsel. Judge Balasquide served as an assistant district counsel with the INS in Miami, from November 1991 to February 1999. Judge Balasquide joined the Department of Justice in 1991 through the Attorney General�s Honor Program. He is a member of the Puerto Rico Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Balasquide were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2017 through 2022. During this period, court records show that Judge Balasquide decided 1237 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 262, granted 3 other types of relief, and denied relief to 972. Converted to percentage terms, Balasquide denied 78.6 percent and granted 21.4 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Balasquide's denial rate each fiscal year over this recent period. (Rates for years with less than 25 decisions are not shown.)

Nationwide Comparisons

Compared to Judge Balasquide's denial rate of 78.6 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 63.8 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Miami Immigration Court where Judge Balasquide decided these cases denied asylum 86.4 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Balasquide's asylum grant and denial rates are compared with other judges serving on the same court in this table. Note that when an Immigration Judge serves on more than one court during the same period, separate Immigration Judge reports are created for any Court in which the judge rendered at least 100 asylum decisions.

Why Do Denial Rates Vary Among Judges?

Although denial rates are shaped by each Judge's judicial philosophy, denial rates are also shaped by other factors, such as the types of cases on the Judge's docket, the detained status of immigrant respondents, current immigration policies, and other factors beyond an individual Judge's control. For example, TRAC has previously found that legal representation and the nationality of the asylum seeker are just two factors that appear to impact asylum decision outcomes.

The composition of cases may differ significantly between Immigration Courts in the country. Within a single Court when cases are randomly assigned to judges sitting on that Court, each Judge should have roughly a similar composition of cases given a sufficient number of asylum cases. Then variations in asylum decisions among Judges on the same Immigration Court would appear to reflect, at least in part, the judicial philosophy that the Judge brings to the bench. However, if judges within a Court are assigned to specialized dockets or hearing locations, then case compositions are likely to continue to differ and can contribute to differences in asylum denial rates.

Representation

When asylum seekers are not represented by an attorney, almost all of them (83%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Balasquide, 8.5% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure 3. For the nation as a whole, about 16.7% of asylum seekers are not represented.

Nationality

Asylum seekers are a diverse group. Over one hundred different nationalities had at least one hundred individuals claiming asylum decided during this period. As might be expected, immigration courts located in different parts of the country tend to have proportionately larger shares from some countries than from others. And, given the required legal grounds for a successful asylum claim, asylum seekers from some nations tend to be more successful than others.

The largest group of asylum seekers appearing before Judge Balasquide came from Guatemala. Individuals from this country made up 41.7% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Balasquide were: Honduras (29.3%), El Salvador (8.5%), Haiti (5.1%), Venezuela (3.7%). See Figure 4.

In the nation as a whole during this same period, major nationalities of asylum seekers, in descending order of frequency, were El Salvador (18.2%), Guatemala (16.0%), Honduras (14.6%), Mexico (10.5%), China (7.5%), India (4.5%), Cuba (2.5%), Venezuela (2.1%), Ecuador (2.1%), Nicaragua (1.9%), Haiti (1.7%), Cameroon (1.5%), Nepal (1.2%).