Judge Erica J. McGuirk

FY 2018 - 2023, Houston - Greenspoint Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Attorney General Barr appointed Erica J. McGuirk to begin hearing cases in October 2019.Judge McGuirk earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1993 from University of Connecticut and a JurisDoctor in 1998 from the University of Iowa College of Law. From 2012 to 2019, she served asan associate counsel with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of HomelandSecurity (DHS), in Houston. From 2003 to 2012, she served as a senior attorney and assistantchief counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, DHS, inHouston. From 2002 to 2003, she served as an assistant district counsel, Office of the DistrictCounsel, with the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, Department of Justice, inHouston. From 1998 to 2002, she served as a trial attorney with the Office of the Solicitor,Department of Labor, in Dallas. Judge McGuirk is a member of the Iowa State Bar andTexas State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge McGuirk were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge McGuirk decided 134 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 9, granted 1 other types of relief, and denied relief to 124. Converted to percentage terms, McGuirk denied 92.5 percent and granted 7.4 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge McGuirk'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 McGuirk's denial rate of 92.5 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Houston - Greenspoint Immigration Court where Judge McGuirk decided these cases denied asylum 87.4 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge McGuirk'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 McGuirk, 11.9% 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 McGuirk came from Honduras. Individuals from this country made up 41.8% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge McGuirk were: El Salvador (23.1%), Guatemala (10.4%), Mexico (5.2%), Nigeria (3.7%). 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%).