Judge Michael Lloyd

FY 2017 - 2022, New York Immigration Court

Published Oct 26, 2022

Attorney General William P. Barr appointed Michael W. Lloyd as an immigration judge in June2020. Judge Lloyd earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1982 from the University of Wyoming, a JurisDoctor in 1989 from the University of South Dakota, and a Master of Laws in 1993 from theUniversity of Denver. From 1991 to 2020, he served as an attorney, Office of Chief Counsel,Internal Revenue Service, primarily in Denver. From 1989 to 1991, he served as law clerk forBankruptcy Judge Peder K. Ecker, District of South Dakota, in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. From1995 to 2010, he served as a judge advocate in the Wyoming Air National Guard, in Cheyenne,Wyoming. From 1985 to 1995, he served as a judge advocate, budget officer, and aircraftmaintenance officer with the South Dakota Air National Guard, in Sioux Falls. Judge Lloyd is amember of the State Bar of Colorado and Wyoming State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Lloyd were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2017 through 2022. During this period, court records show that Judge Lloyd decided 202 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 110, granted 1 other types of relief, and denied relief to 91. Converted to percentage terms, Lloyd denied 45.0 percent and granted 55.0 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Lloyd'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 Lloyd's denial rate of 45.0 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 63.8 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the New York Immigration Court where Judge Lloyd decided these cases denied asylum 34 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Lloyd'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 Lloyd, 1.5% 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 Lloyd came from . Individuals from this country made up . of his caseload. 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%).