Judge Loi L. McCleskey

FY 2018 - 2023, San Francisco Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Loi L. McCleskey was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021.Judge McCleskey earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1996 from Capital University and a Juris Doctorin 1999 from Capital University Law School. From 2013 to 2021, she served as anAdministrative Hearing Officer Supervisor; from 2011 to 2013, Senior Administrative HearingOfficer; and from 2003 to 2011, Administrative Hearing Officer for the State of Ohio inColumbus. From 2000 to 2003, she was in private practice in Columbus. Judge McCleskey is amember of the Ohio State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge McCleskey were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge McCleskey decided 358 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 255, granted 5 other types of relief, and denied relief to 98. Converted to percentage terms, McCleskey denied 27.4 percent and granted 72.6 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge McCleskey'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 McCleskey's denial rate of 27.4 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the San Francisco Immigration Court where Judge McCleskey decided these cases denied asylum 29.2 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge McCleskey'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 McCleskey, 6.4% 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 McCleskey came from India. Individuals from this country made up 31.8% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge McCleskey were: Mexico (18.2%), Guatemala (14.8%), El Salvador (12.8%), China (5.9%). 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%).