Judge Benjamin Rosen

FY 2018 - 2023, Miami Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Benjamin D. Rosen was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in October 2022. Judge Rosen earned a Bachelor of Science in 1999 from Bradley University and a Juris Doctor in 2002 from the American University Washington College of Law. From 2003 to 2022, he served as an assistant chief counsel (ACC), Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, in Miami. From 2010 to 2013, while an ACC, he served as a special assistant United States Attorney, at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida. From 2002 to 2003, he served as an assistant district counsel with the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, in Miami, entering on duty through the Attorney General’s Honors Program. Judge Rosen is a member of the Missouri Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Rosen were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Rosen decided 167 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 27, granted 0 other types of relief, and denied relief to 140. Converted to percentage terms, Rosen denied 83.8 percent and granted 16.2 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Rosen'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 Rosen's denial rate of 83.8 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Miami Immigration Court where Judge Rosen decided these cases denied asylum 85.3 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Rosen'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 Rosen, 15% 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 Rosen came from Colombia. Individuals from this country made up 25.7% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Rosen were: Brazil (20.4%), Haiti (18.6%), Honduras (13.2%), Guatemala (9.6%). 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%).