Judge Jennifer M. Riedthaler-Williams

FY 2019 - 2024, Cleveland Immigration Court

Published Nov 7, 2024

Attorney General William Barr appointed Jennifer Margaret Riedthaler Williams to beginhearing cases in May 2019. Judge Riedthaler Williams earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1998 fromBaldwin Wallace College, a Juris Doctor in 2001 from Case Western Reserve University Schoolof Law, and a Master of Public Administration in 2006 from Cleveland State University. From2017 to 2019, she served as a judicial magistrate with the Lorain County Domestic RelationsCourt in Elyria, Ohio. From 2005 to 2017, she served as an assistant prosecuting attorney withthe Lorain County Prosecutor’s Office in Elyria, Ohio, in the felony criminal division. From2001 to 2005, she served as an assistant prosecuting attorney in the same office working in thejuvenile and felony non-support division. Judge Riedthaler Williams is a member of the OhioBar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Riedthaler-Williams were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2019 through 2024. During this period, court records show that Judge Riedthaler-Williams decided 259 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 43, granted 11 other types of relief, and denied relief to 205. Converted to percentage terms, Riedthaler-Williams denied 79.2 percent and granted 20.8 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Riedthaler-Williams'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 Riedthaler-Williams's denial rate of 79.2 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 57.7 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Cleveland Immigration Court where Judge Riedthaler-Williams decided these cases denied asylum 77.3 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Riedthaler-Williams'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 Riedthaler-Williams, 10% 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 Riedthaler-Williams came from El Salvador. Individuals from this country made up 22.4% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Riedthaler-Williams were: Guatemala (19.3%), Honduras (17.0%), Mexico (6.6%), India (5.0%). 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 (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%).