Judge Jennifer I. Gaz

FY 2017 - 2022, Eloy Immigration Court

Published Oct 26, 2022

Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed Jennifer I. Gaz to begin hearing cases in April 2017. Judge Gaz earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1994 from the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign and a Juris Doctor in 1997 from the DePaul University College of Law. From May 2007 through April 2017, she served as an assistant chief counsel for the Office of Chief Counsel, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, in Eloy and Phoenix, Ariz. From November 2003 to April 2007, she was an associate attorney with Wolin, Kelter & Rosen Ltd. From October 2000 to October 2003, she served as staff counsel with the Office of the General Counsel, Chicago Housing Authority. From 1999 to 2000, she was an associate attorney with Fraterrigo, Beranek, Feiereisel & Kasbohm in Chicago. From 1997 to 1999, she was an associate attorney with Eannace, Meade & Associates. Judge Gaz is a member of the Illinois State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Gaz were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2017 through 2022. During this period, court records show that Judge Gaz decided 488 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 194, granted 11 other types of relief, and denied relief to 283. Converted to percentage terms, Gaz denied 58.0 percent and granted 42.1 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Gaz'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 Gaz's denial rate of 58.0 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 63.8 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Eloy Immigration Court where Judge Gaz decided these cases denied asylum 64.7 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Gaz'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 Gaz, 65% 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 Gaz came from Cuba. Individuals from this country made up 25.2% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Gaz were: Mexico (16.8%), Guatemala (11.9%), Venezuela (8.8%), Honduras (7.4%). 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%).