Judge Mirlande Tadal

FY 2018 - 2023, Elizabeth Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Judge Tadal was appointed as an Immigration Judge in September 1995. Prior to her transfer to Elizabeth in May 1997, Judge Tadal served as an Immigration Judge in New York. She received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Hofstra University in 1979, and a Juris Doctorate from Howard University School of Law in 1982. From 1989 to 1995, she worked as a manager/attorney/director of the Immigration Unit for Travelers Aid Immigration Legal Services in New York. She served as an attorney/supervisor for the Volunteers of Legal Services from 1987 to 1989, also in New York. Judge Tadal served as an attorney investigator for the New York Commission on Human Rights from 1985 to 1989. She is a member of the New York Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Tadal were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Tadal decided 201 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 24, granted 5 other types of relief, and denied relief to 172. Converted to percentage terms, Tadal denied 85.6 percent and granted 14.4 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Tadal'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 Tadal's denial rate of 85.6 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Elizabeth Immigration Court where Judge Tadal decided these cases denied asylum 76.2 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Tadal'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 (80%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Tadal, 28.9% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure 3. For the nation as a whole, about 15.7% 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 Tadal came from El Salvador. Individuals from this country made up 13.9% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Tadal were: Mexico (11.4%), Guatemala (10.9%), Honduras (7.0%), Jamaica (6.5%). 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 (16.6%), Guatemala (15.1%), Honduras (13.8%), Mexico (9.2%), China (6.8%), India (5.1%), Venezuela (3.2%), Ecuador (3.1%), Cuba (2.4%), Nicaragua (2.3%), Brazil (2.0%), Colombia (1.4%), Cameroon (1.4%).