Judge Dania Nassar

FY 2018 - 2023, New York Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Dania Nassar was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in October 2022. Judge Nassar earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2007 from the University of Texas at Austin and a Juris Doctor in 2011 from South Texas College of Law in Houston. From 2021 to 2022, Judge Nassar served as a supervising administrative law judge and from 2017 to 2021, she served as an administrative law judge at the New York State Office of Children and Family Services – Bureau of Special Hearings in New York City. From 2014 to 2017, Judge Nassar served as an agency attorney for the New York City Administration for Children's Services in Brooklyn, New York. From 2013 to 2014, she was of counsel to a private immigration law firm in New York City. In 2011, she was a legal fellow at Amnesty International – USA in New York City. Judge Nassar is a member of the New York State Bar and the State Bar of Texas.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Nassar were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Nassar decided 138 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 108, granted 2 other types of relief, and denied relief to 28. Converted to percentage terms, Nassar denied 20.3 percent and granted 79.7 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Nassar'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 Nassar's denial rate of 20.3 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the New York Immigration Court where Judge Nassar decided these cases denied asylum 34.4 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Nassar'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 Nassar, 11.6% 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 Nassar came from China. Individuals from this country made up 30.4% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Nassar were: Bangladesh (15.9%), Colombia (9.4%), India (9.4%), Ecuador (6.5%). 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%).