Judge Joseph La Rocca

FY 2018 - 2023, New Orleans Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Attorney General Eric Holder appointed Judge La Rocca to begin hearing cases in June 2015.Judge La Rocca received a bachelor of arts degree in 1998 and a juris doctorate in 2001, bothfrom Louisiana State University. From July 2006 to May 2015, Judge La Rocca served at theU.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, in variouscapacities including senior attorney and assistant chief counsel, in New Orleans. From 2002 to2006, he was an attorney at David Ware & Associates, in Metairie, La. From 2001 to 2002,Judge La Rocca was an attorney at the Holliday Law Firm, in Baton Rouge, La. Judge La Roccais a member of the Louisiana State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Larocca were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Larocca decided 1116 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 199, granted 16 other types of relief, and denied relief to 901. Converted to percentage terms, Larocca denied 80.7 percent and granted 19.2 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Larocca'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 Larocca's denial rate of 80.7 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the New Orleans Immigration Court where Judge Larocca decided these cases denied asylum 82.8 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Larocca'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 (80%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Larocca, 15.8% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure 3. For the nation as a whole, about 15.7% 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 Larocca came from Honduras. Individuals from this country made up 47.8% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Larocca were: Guatemala (21.4%), El Salvador (9.1%), Mexico (7.6%), India (3.1%). 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%).