Judge Kenneth Sogabe

FY 2019 - 2024, Seattle Immigration Court

Published Nov 7, 2024

Kenneth S. Sogabe was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in July 2021.Judge Sogabe earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1995 and a Master of Arts in 1996, both from SanFrancisco State University, and a Juris Doctor in 2001 from Golden Gate University School ofLaw. From 2018 to 2021, he served as Associate General Counsel, Office of General Counsel,Department of Defense Education Activity, in Okinawa, Japan. From 2014 to 2018, he served asan Attorney Advisor, Office of Chief Counsel, Customs and Border Protection, DHS, in SanFrancisco. From 2007 to 2014, he served as a Staff Attorney for the U.S. Court of Appeals forthe Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco. From 2001 to 2006, he served as an Assistant Chief Counsel,Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department ofHomeland Security (DHS), in San Francisco. Judge Sogabe is a member of the State Bar ofCalifornia.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Sogabe were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2019 through 2024. During this period, court records show that Judge Sogabe decided 912 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 177, granted 5 other types of relief, and denied relief to 730. Converted to percentage terms, Sogabe denied 80.0 percent and granted 19.9 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Sogabe'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 Sogabe's denial rate of 80.0 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 57.7 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Seattle Immigration Court where Judge Sogabe decided these cases denied asylum 70.1 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Sogabe'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 Sogabe, 50% 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 Sogabe came from Mexico. Individuals from this country made up 17.4% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Sogabe were: Brazil (12.9%), Honduras (12.8%), Guatemala (10.7%), Colombia (9.5%). 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 (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%).