Judge Molly S. Frazer

FY 2018 - 2023, Florence Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch appointed Molly S. Frazer to begin hearing cases in September 2016. Judge Frazer earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1983 from the University of Iowa and a Juris Doctor in 1986 from the Drake University Law School. From 2004 to September 2016, she served as a senior attorney for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in Tucson, Ariz. From 2000 through 2004 she served as an assistant chief counsel for the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), Department of Justice (DOJ), and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, DHS. From 1996 through 2000, she served as a sector counsel for the U.S. Border Patrol, INS, DOJ. From 1990 through 1996, she was an assistant county attorney for Story County, Iowa. From 1988 through 1990, she was an assistant city attorney for the City of Waterloo, Iowa. From 1986 through 1987, she was an assistant county attorney for Black Hawk County, Iowa. Judge Frazer is a member of the Iowa State Bar and the State Bar of Texas.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Frazer were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Frazer decided 144 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 54, granted 8 other types of relief, and denied relief to 82. Converted to percentage terms, Frazer denied 56.9 percent and granted 43.1 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Frazer'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 Frazer's denial rate of 56.9 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Florence Immigration Court where Judge Frazer decided these cases denied asylum 76.9 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Frazer'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 Frazer, 62.5% 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 Frazer came from Mexico. Individuals from this country made up 27.8% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Frazer were: Honduras (18.1%), Cuba (13.9%), Guatemala (10.4%), Nicaragua (4.9%). 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%).