Judge Juliana Zach

FY 2019 - 2024, Boston Immigration Court

Published Nov 7, 2024

Juliana Zach was appointed as an immigration judge to begin hearing cases in August 2023. Judge Zach earned a Bachelor of Law in 1994 from the Universidade Católica de Pernambuco, a Master of Business Administration in 2004 from the Florida Metropolitan University, and a Juris Doctor in 2008 from the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University. From 2013 to 2023, she worked in private practice at Zach Law Firm LLC specializing in family and criminal litigation in Connecticut, as well as immigration law at the Zach Law Firm LLC. From 2013 to 2020, she also served as an attorney for the Brazilian Consulate General in Hartford, Connecticut. From 2009 to 2011, she served as an assistant state attorney for the felony division at the 18th Judicial Circuit in Sanford, Florida. Judge Zach is a member of the Connecticut Bar and the Florida Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Zach were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2019 through 2024. During this period, court records show that Judge Zach decided 191 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 17, granted 3 other types of relief, and denied relief to 171. Converted to percentage terms, Zach denied 89.5 percent and granted 10.5 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Zach'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 Zach's denial rate of 89.5 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 57.7 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Boston Immigration Court where Judge Zach decided these cases denied asylum 50.1 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Zach'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 Zach, 5.2% 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 Zach came from Brazil. Individuals from this country made up 74.9% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Zach were: Colombia (6.3%), Ecuador (5.2%), Guatemala (3.1%), Democratic Republic of Congo (2.6%). 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%).