Judge Jeremy J. Butler

FY 2017 - 2022, San Francisco Immigration Court

Published Oct 26, 2022

Attorney General William P. Barr appointed Jeremy J. Butler as an immigration judge in June2020. Judge Butler earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2003 from Cornell College and a Juris Doctor in2006 from Valparaiso University School of Law. From May 2019 to June 2020, he served asdeputy chief of the Civil Division and an assistant U.S. attorney at the U.S. Attorney’s Office forthe District of Hawaii, in Honolulu. From 2014 to 2019, he served as an assistant U.S. attorney,Civil Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona, in Tucson. From 2012 to 2014,he served as an assistant attorney general, Civil Division, Arizona Attorney General’s Office, inTucson. From 2008 to 2011, he was an associate attorney with Burke, Costanza, & CarberryLLP, in Merrillville, Indiana. From 2006 to 2008, he served as a judicial law clerk for the U.S.District Court, District of Northern Indiana, in Merrillville. Judge Butler is a member of theArizona State Bar and Indiana State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Butler were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2017 through 2022. During this period, court records show that Judge Butler decided 415 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 335, granted 0 other types of relief, and denied relief to 80. Converted to percentage terms, Butler denied 19.3 percent and granted 80.7 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Butler'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 Butler's denial rate of 19.3 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 63.8 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the San Francisco Immigration Court where Judge Butler decided these cases denied asylum 32.1 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Butler'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 Butler, 2.9% 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 Butler came from India. Individuals from this country made up 28.2% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Butler were: Guatemala (22.7%), Mexico (14.5%), El Salvador (14.2%), Honduras (5.1%). 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%).