Judge Blake Doughty

FY 2019 - 2024, Atlanta Immigration Court

Published Nov 7, 2024

Attorney General William P. Barr appointed Blake L. Doughty as an Immigration Judge inOctober 2020. Judge Doughty earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2004 from the University of Georgiaand a Juris Doctor in 2008 from Roger Williams University School of Law. From 2019 to 2020,he served as deputy chief counsel, Office of Chief Counsel (OCC), Office of the Principal LegalAdvisor (OPLA), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Department of HomelandSecurity (DHS), in Atlanta. From 2015 to 2019, he served as an assistant chief counsel, OCC,OPLA, ICE, DHS, in Atlanta and Lumpkin, Georgia. From 2014 to 2015, he served as anassistant district attorney, in Hall County, Georgia. From 2009 to 2014, he served as a U.S. Armyjudge advocate in the following locations: Fort Bragg, North Carolina; Kandahar Airfield,Afghanistan; and Fort Benning, Georgia. Judge Doughty is a member of the Georgia State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Doughty were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2019 through 2024. During this period, court records show that Judge Doughty decided 444 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 83, granted 5 other types of relief, and denied relief to 356. Converted to percentage terms, Doughty denied 80.2 percent and granted 19.8 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Doughty'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 Doughty's denial rate of 80.2 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 57.7 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Atlanta Immigration Court where Judge Doughty decided these cases denied asylum 84 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Doughty'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 Doughty, 16% 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 Doughty came from Venezuela. Individuals from this country made up 25.7% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Doughty were: Guatemala (16.2%), El Salvador (10.6%), Honduras (10.4%), Nicaragua (9.9%). 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 (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%).