Judge Gabrielle Jones

FY 2019 - 2024, New Orleans Immigration Court

Published Nov 7, 2024

Gabrielle D. Jones was appointed as an immigration judge to begin hearing cases in May 2023. Judge Jones earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1998 from McNeese State University and a Juris Doctor in 2001 from Southern University Law Center. From 2014 to 2023, she was the deputy directing attorney of the Family Justice Project at the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada (LACSN) and managed the Immigration Advocacy Project where her cases involved domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking, and abused, neglected and abandoned children. During this time at LACSN, she also handled cases in Las Vegas before EOIR and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security. Additionally in this role, she collaborated with community partners to provide immigration-related educational classes, legal clinics and free consultations. From 2008 to 2014, she was a domestic violence attorney at LACSN handling divorce, custody, and protection order cases. From 2006 to 2007, she was the managing attorney for the Louisiana Civil Justice Center. From 2002 to 2005, she was a litigation and foreclosure Attorney at Butler & Hosch PA. From 2001 to 2002, she was a closing attorney at Garland Title & Escrow. Judge Jones is a member of the District of Columbia Bar, Louisiana State Bar, and the State Bar of Nevada.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Jones were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2019 through 2024. During this period, court records show that Judge Jones decided 204 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 102, granted 7 other types of relief, and denied relief to 95. Converted to percentage terms, Jones denied 46.6 percent and granted 53.4 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Jones'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 Jones's denial rate of 46.6 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 57.7 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the New Orleans Immigration Court where Judge Jones decided these cases denied asylum 70.9 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Jones'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 Jones, 5.4% 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 Jones came from Honduras. Individuals from this country made up 50.0% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Jones were: Nicaragua (26.0%), Guatemala (5.4%), India (4.4%), Venezuela (4.4%). 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%).