Judge Brian Sardelli

FY 2018 - 2023, Bloomington Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Attorney General William Barr appointed Brian Sardelli to begin hearing cases in October 2019.Judge Sardelli earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1997 from the University of Minnesota, Duluth, anda Juris Doctor in 2000 from Mitchell Hamline School of Law. From 2017 to 2019, he worked inprivate practice. From 2012 to 2017, he served as a trial attorney in the Narcotic and DangerousDrug Section, Department of Justice, in the District of Columbia. From 2006 to 2012, he servedas an AUSA in the Southern District of Texas and the District of Arizona. From 2001 to 2005, heserved as an army officer and judge advocate with the First Infantry Division serving in Virginia,Germany, Kosovo, and Iraq. Judge Sardelli is a member of the Minnesota State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Sardelli were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Sardelli decided 387 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 71, granted 2 other types of relief, and denied relief to 314. Converted to percentage terms, Sardelli denied 81.1 percent and granted 18.8 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Sardelli'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 Sardelli's denial rate of 81.1 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Bloomington Immigration Court where Judge Sardelli decided these cases denied asylum 70 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Sardelli'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 Sardelli, 2.1% 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 Sardelli came from Guatemala. Individuals from this country made up 25.1% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Sardelli were: El Salvador (17.6%), Honduras (12.9%), Mexico (9.8%), Ecuador (8.0%). 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%).