Judge Denise Hunter

FY 2019 - 2024, Sacramento Immigration Court

Published Nov 7, 2024

Denise M. Hunter was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in October 2022. Judge Hunter earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2006 from Wesley – Delaware State University (formerly Wesley College) and a Juris Doctor in 2011 from The George Washington University Law School. From 2021 to 2022, she was the LGBTQ+ Program Legal Director at California Rural Legal Assistance. Inc., in Modesto, California, and served on the Board of AsylumWorks in Washington, D.C. From 2017 to 2021, she was senior staff attorney – immigration at Whitman-Walker Health (WWH) in Washington, D.C. From 2015 to 2017, she was staff attorney – immigration at WWH. From 2014 to 2015, she was an immigration staff attorney at Ayuda in Washington, D.C. From 2012 to 2014 she was staff attorney at Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Arlington, Hogar Immigrant Services, in Falls Church, Virginia. Judge Hunter is a member of the District of Columbia Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Hunter were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2019 through 2024. During this period, court records show that Judge Hunter decided 262 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 233, granted 0 other types of relief, and denied relief to 29. Converted to percentage terms, Hunter denied 11.1 percent and granted 88.9 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Hunter'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 Hunter's denial rate of 11.1 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 57.7 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Sacramento Immigration Court where Judge Hunter decided these cases denied asylum 27.5 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Hunter'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 Hunter, 29.4% 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 Hunter came from Russia. Individuals from this country made up 49.6% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Hunter were: India (17.2%), Afghanistan (9.2%), Guatemala (5.3%), Belarus (3.8%). 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%).