Judge Clarease Rankin Yates

FY 2019 - 2024, Houston - Gessner Immigration Court

Published Nov 7, 2024

Judge Yates was appointed as an Immigration Judge in May 1990. She received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1973, and a Juris Doctorate in 1976, both from Temple University. Prior to becoming an Immigration Judge, she worked as an administrative law judge for the DC Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs from 1985 to 1990. From 1980 to 1985, Judge Yates served as an attorney advisor in the Office of General Counsel at the United States International Commission. She worked as an attorney with the law firm of Harper and Tatum in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from 1976 to 1980. Judge Yates has been an adjunct professor teaching immigration law at the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University since 1991. Judge Yates is a member of both the Pennsylvania and District of Columbia Bars.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Rankin Yates were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2019 through 2024. During this period, court records show that Judge Rankin Yates decided 390 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 33, granted 39 other types of relief, and denied relief to 318. Converted to percentage terms, Rankin Yates denied 81.5 percent and granted 18.5 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Rankin Yates'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 Rankin Yates's denial rate of 81.5 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 57.7 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Houston - Gessner Immigration Court where Judge Rankin Yates decided these cases denied asylum 79.6 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Rankin Yates'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 (77%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Rankin Yates, 20.5% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure 3. For the nation as a whole, about 16.4% 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 Rankin Yates came from El Salvador. Individuals from this country made up 34.1% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Rankin Yates were: Honduras (27.9%), Guatemala (15.4%), Mexico (8.5%), Nicaragua (3.1%). 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 (14.0%), Guatemala (13.2%), Honduras (12.4%), Mexico (8.2%), China (6.1%), India (5.4%), Venezuela (4.0%), Ecuador (3.7%), Nicaragua (3.5%), Colombia (2.9%), Cuba (2.6%), Brazil (2.6%), Russia (2.4%).