Judge David H. Burke

FY 2018 - 2023, Van Nuys Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Judge Burke was appointed as an immigration judge in November 2009. He received abachelor of arts degree in 1985 from California State University, Fullerton, a master of artsdegree in 1991 from the University of California, Santa Barbara, and a juris doctorate in 1995from the University of Colorado Law School. From 2008 to November 2009, Judge Burkeserved as an associate general counsel, Office of the Chief Counsel, U.S. Citizenship andImmigration Services, DHS, in Dallas, Texas. From 2002 to 2008, Judge Burke worked as anassistant chief counsel, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), DHS, where he served asa special assistant U.S. attorney, in El Paso, Texas. From 1996 to 2002, he served as an assistantdistrict counsel with the former INS in Los Angeles. Judge Burke is a member of the ColoradoState Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Burke were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Burke decided 632 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 275, granted 59 other types of relief, and denied relief to 298. Converted to percentage terms, Burke denied 47.2 percent and granted 52.8 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Burke'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 Burke's denial rate of 47.2 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Van Nuys Immigration Court where Judge Burke decided these cases denied asylum 50.5 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Burke'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 Burke, 4.4% 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 Burke came from El Salvador. Individuals from this country made up 21.0% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Burke were: Armenia (16.8%), Mexico (16.6%), Russia (10.3%), Guatemala (8.5%). 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%).