Judge Shelly W. Schools

FY 2017 - 2022, Harlingen Immigration Court

Published Oct 26, 2022

Attorney General William Barr appointed Shelly W. Schools to begin hearing cases in October2019. Judge Schools earned a Bachelor of Science in 1994 from the University of Mississippi, aJuris Doctor in 1997 from the University of Mississippi, and a Master of Military OperationalArt and Science in 2009 from Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell Air Force Base,Alabama. In 2019, she retired as a colonel from the U.S. Air Force. From 1997 to 2019, JudgeSchools served as a judge advocate, prosecutor, defense counsel at the trial and appellate level,staff judge advocate, and trial judge in the U.S. Air Force at the following locations: GoodfellowAir Force Base, Texas; Bolling Air Force Base, District of Columbia; Maxwell Air Force Base,Alabama; Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri; the Pentagon, District of Columbia: Little RockAir Force Base, Arkansas; U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado; Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, Texas; and Travis Air Force Base, California. Judge Schools is a member of theMississippi State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Schools were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2017 through 2022. During this period, court records show that Judge Schools decided 173 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 29, granted 1 other types of relief, and denied relief to 143. Converted to percentage terms, Schools denied 82.7 percent and granted 17.4 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Schools'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 Schools's denial rate of 82.7 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 63.8 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Harlingen Immigration Court where Judge Schools decided these cases denied asylum 80.5 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Schools'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 Schools, 67.1% 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 Schools came from Cuba. Individuals from this country made up 27.7% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Schools were: Honduras (24.9%), Venezuela (24.9%), El Salvador (11.6%), Nicaragua (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%).