Home > Immigration > Tools > Judge Reports

Judge Irma J. Newburn
FY 2018 - 2023, Memphis Immigration Court

Published Oct 19, 2023

Irma J. Newburn was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in December 2021. Judge Newburn earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2002 from Cameron University and a Juris Doctor in 2007 from Oklahoma City University School of Law. From 2016 to 2021, she served as a District Judge for Comanche, Cotton, Jefferson and Stephens counties, in Oklahoma. During that time, from 2019 to 2021, she also served on the Oklahoma Court on the Judiciary-Trial Division, in Oklahoma City. From 2008 to 2016, she served as an Assistant District Attorney, including First Assistant District Attorney, for Comanche and Cotton counties, in Oklahoma. From 2007 to 2008, she was an attorney with Tayloe, Johnson, and Newburn, in Lawton, Oklahoma. Judge Newburn is a member of the Oklahoma Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Newburn were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2018 through 2023. During this period, court records show that Judge Newburn decided 112 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 28, granted 1 other types of relief, and denied relief to 83. Converted to percentage terms, Newburn denied 74.1 percent and granted 25.9 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Newburn'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 Newburn's denial rate of 74.1 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 60.6 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Memphis Immigration Court where Judge Newburn decided these cases denied asylum 83.7 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Newburn'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 Newburn, 0% 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 Newburn came from Honduras. Individuals from this country made up 30.4% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Newburn were: Guatemala (19.6%), South Africa (11.6%), El Salvador (10.7%), Venezuela (10.7%). 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.