Judge Stuart D. Alcorn

FY 2017 - 2022, Pearsall Immigration Court

Published Oct 26, 2022

Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed Stuart D. Alcorn to begin hearing cases in August2018. Judge Alcorn earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1994 from the University of SouthernMississippi and a Juris Doctor in 2004 from the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at TexasSouthern University. From 2008 to 2018, he served as assistant chief counsel for Immigrationand Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security in San Antonio, Texas. From2008 to 2017, he also served as a military defense attorney in the Judge Advocate General’s(JAG) Corps, U.S. Army Reserve. From 2005 to 2008, he was a military prosecutor andcommand judge advocate in the JAG Corps at Fort Benning, Ga. In addition to military duties,during 2005 to 2008, he was special assistant U.S. attorney in the U.S. Attorney’s Office inColumbus, Ga. In 2004, he was a law clerk for Ron Woods’ legal practice in Houston. From2002 to 2004, he was a student clerk in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Houston. Judge Alcorn is amember of the State Bar of Texas.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Alcorn were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2017 through 2022. During this period, court records show that Judge Alcorn decided 395 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 91, granted 25 other types of relief, and denied relief to 279. Converted to percentage terms, Alcorn denied 70.6 percent and granted 29.3 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Alcorn'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 Alcorn's denial rate of 70.6 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 63.8 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Pearsall Immigration Court where Judge Alcorn decided these cases denied asylum 73.9 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Alcorn'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 Alcorn, 59.7% 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 Alcorn came from Honduras. Individuals from this country made up 20.5% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Alcorn were: Cuba (17.2%), Mexico (9.4%), El Salvador (8.6%), Cameroon (5.8%). 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%).