Judge Tyler Wood

FY 2019 - 2024, Denver Immigration Court

Published Nov 7, 2024

Tyler Wood was appointed as an immigration judge to begin hearing cases in November 2023. Judge Wood earned a Bachelor of Science in 2006 from Truman State University, a Master of Science in 2008 from the University of Missouri-Kansas City, and a Juris Doctor in 2011 from the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law. From 2015 to 2023, he served as an assistant chief counsel with the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in Denver. In 2015, he was an associate attorney with Senter Goldfarb & Rice LLC in Denver. From 2012 to 2015, he served as an assistant chief counsel, OPLA, ICE, DHS, in Arlington, Virginia. From 2011 to 2012, he served as a presidential management fellow with the Office of Biometric Identity Management in Arlington and then with OPLA, ICE, DHS, in Washington, D.C. Judge Wood is a member of the Missouri Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Wood were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2019 through 2024. During this period, court records show that Judge Wood decided 265 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 42, granted 2 other types of relief, and denied relief to 221. Converted to percentage terms, Wood denied 83.4 percent and granted 16.6 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Wood'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 Wood's denial rate of 83.4 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 57.7 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Denver Immigration Court where Judge Wood decided these cases denied asylum 62.7 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Wood'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 Wood, 35.5% 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 Wood came from Colombia. Individuals from this country made up 67.5% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Wood were: Peru (9.4%), Mexico (8.7%), Russia (7.2%), Afghanistan (4.2%). 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%).