Home > Immigration > Tools > Judge Reports

Judge Rosalind K. Malloy
FY 2018 - 2023, Philadelphia Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Judge Malloy was appointed as an Immigration Judge in December 1998. Prior to her appointment to the Immigration Court in Philadelphia, Judge Malloy served as an Immigration Judge at the Immigration Court in Los Angeles from December 1998 to December 2001. She received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1964 from Hunter College, City University of New York; a Master of Arts degree in 1971 and a Masters of Education degree in 1975, both from Teachers College, Columbia University ; and a Juris Doctorate in 1979 from Rutgers University. Judge Malloy was an assistant district counsel with the former Immigration and Naturalization Service in New York from 1995 to 1998. From 1993 to 1994, she served as a hearing officer with the Georgia Department of Corrections in Atlanta, Georgia. Judge Malloy was in private practice in Atlanta from 1990 to 1993. She worked as an assistant district attorney in New York from 1984 to 1989. Previously, Judge Malloy served as a teacher/guidance counselor with the New York City Board of Education, John F. Kennedy High School, Bronx, New York, and as a volunteer in Nigeria. Judge Malloy is a member of both the New York and Georgia Bars.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Malloy were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Malloy decided 408 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 165, granted 4 other types of relief, and denied relief to 239. Converted to percentage terms, Malloy denied 58.6 percent and granted 41.4 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Malloy's denial rate each fiscal year over this recent period. (Rates for years with less than 25 decisions are not shown.)

Figure 1: Percent of Asylum Matters Denied

Nationwide Comparisons

Compared to Judge Malloy's denial rate of 58.6 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Philadelphia Immigration Court where Judge Malloy decided these cases denied asylum 54.7 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Malloy'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.

Figure 2: Comparing Denial Rates (percents)

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.


When asylum seekers are not represented by an attorney, almost all of them (80%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Malloy, 4.4% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure 3. For the nation as a whole, about 15.7% of asylum seekers are not represented.

Figure 3: Asylum Seeker Had Representation


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 Malloy came from Guatemala. Individuals from this country made up 33.1% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Malloy were: El Salvador (9.3%), Honduras (9.3%), Mexico (5.4%), China (4.9%). 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 (16.6%), Guatemala (15.1%), Honduras (13.8%), Mexico (9.2%), China (6.8%), India (5.1%), Venezuela (3.2%), Ecuador (3.1%), Cuba (2.4%), Nicaragua (2.3%), Brazil (2.0%), Colombia (1.4%), Cameroon (1.4%).

Figure 4: Asylum Decisions by Nationality
TRAC is a nonpartisan, nonprofit data research center affiliated with the Newhouse School of Public Communications and the Whitman School of Management, both at Syracuse University. For more information, to subscribe, or to donate, contact trac@syr.edu or call 315-443-3563.