The Asylum Backlog, Ad Nauseam Edition

Last month, the Asylum Division released the most recent data about the affirmative asylum backlog. The short story is that the nationwide backlog continues to grow, albeit quite slowly. Also, the growth is not evenly distributed among the various Asylum Offices–some are seeing their backlogs get larger; others are seeing their backlogs shrink. Here, we’ll take a closer look at what is happening in terms of the backlog, and also review some of the (surprising) answers that the Asylum Division gave to questions posed at the quarterly stakeholders meeting.

First, some numbers. In February 2019, the nationwide backlog was 326,767 cases; in March, it was 327,984, meaning that the backlog grew at a rate of less than 0.4%, which is pretty insignificant. However, when we break down the growth rate by Asylum Office, we see a different picture. Some offices had growing backlogs: Arlington (+1.5%), Boston (+0.2%), Houston (+1.8%), Miami (+0.8%), New York (+0.2%), New Orleans (+4.1%), and San Francisco (+0.5%). Other offices had shrinking backlogs: Chicago (-0.2%), Los Angeles (-1.3%), and Newark (-1.9%).

Typical reaction when an asylum seeker learns about the backlog.

What these numbers mean for asylum seekers is not entirely clear. For people in the backlog, only three offices seem to be making any headway at all, and so if your case is stuck in Chicago, LA or Newark, there is at least some hope that you will eventually receive an interview. Backlogged applicants in the other offices are unlikely to receive an interview any time soon, unless they can expedite their case.

For new applicants, my suspicion is that offices with shrinking backlogs are more likely to interview newly-filed cases. For example, most of our cases are filed in three offices: Arlington, Chicago, and Newark. Arlington has a growing backlog, and our experience there is that a minority of our newly filed (LIFO) cases receive interviews. In Chicago and Newark, which both have shrinking backlogs, our newly-filed cases all seem to receive interviews.

So if you plan to file for asylum, and want to maximize the chance for a fast interview, are you better off filing in Chicago, LA or Newark? Maybe. But one issue is that USCIS moves resources from office to office, and so a fast office today might be a slow office tomorrow. An example of this is Los Angeles. For years, LA was the office with the largest asylum backlog. Then, at some point, headquarters sent some help (or made some sort of change), and now LA is one of the “fast” offices. At the Asylum Division Quarterly Stakeholder meeting last month, we asked about the inequitable delays, and the leadership told us that in summer, they re-evaluate how resources are distributed. So maybe there will be changes in the coming months, and this could affect how the local offices process their cases.

What about grant rates at the different offices? There are different ways to calculate grant rates, and so to some degree, whether a particular asylum office is “easy” depends on how you crunch the numbers. I prefer to factor out “no shows” for obvious reasons. I also factor out one-year bar cases, which is arguably a bad idea, and cases referred without an interview. In other words, I want to know the grant rate for cases filed on time, where the person shows up for his interview. Using that method, the overall grant rate for the U.S. for March 2019 (the most recent month available) is 47.7% (had I not factored out the cases I don’t like, the grant rate would be much lower: 27.5%). Looking at grant rates for each office, we have: Arlington (44.0%), Boston (37.8%), Chicago (55.6%), Houston (44.7%), Los Angeles (68.3%), Miami (25.5%), Newark (43.1%), New York (23.7%), New Orleans (68.3%), and San Francisco (69.3%).

While I think there is some value to these numbers, it is important to remember that different offices serve different populations, and some populations are more likely to be denied than others. For example, though many Central American asylum seekers face severe danger, they often have a hard time winning asylum because the harm they typically face does not easily fit within a protected category under the asylum statute. For this reason, an office with many Central American cases might have a lower grant rate than an office that serves a different population. Put another way, a strong case is likely to win regardless of the office where you file. Even so, when you have such a wide range of approval rates, it’s hard to argue that a person is not better off filing in LA, San Francisco or New Orleans, as opposed to Miami or New York.

So that’s more-or-less where we are in terms of the backlog and asylum grant rates, but there is other news from the Asylum Division as well, including about the LIFO system itself. Here, the Asylum Division is claiming a win: “Since the adoption of the LIFO scheduling policy, the Asylum Division has seen an approximately 30% decrease in receipts [i.e., newly-filed asylum cases].” The theory being that frivolous asylum seekers, who just want a work permit, are deterred from filing by the LIFO system. I don’t doubt that the number of asylum seekers has dropped since January 2018, when LIFO went into effect, but I am not convinced that LIFO gets credit (or blame) for this. There could be many reasons for the down turn, including normal fluctuations in applications, the hostile environment for asylum seekers, greater difficulty in obtaining a U.S. visa, etc. However, given that the Asylum Division views LIFO as contributing to a reduction in applications, I would not expect a change in that policy any time soon.

Also at the Stakeholders meeting, the Asylum Division informed us that, between October 2018 and March 2019, “approximately 70 percent of asylum office final decisions were made within two weeks of the completed interview.” I’m a bit more skeptical about this claim. At least I do not see it for my clients, who usually wait months (at least) for a decision. Admittedly, most of my clients are not typical asylum seekers, who come from Latin America and China, and that may skew my perspective (many of my clients come from Muslim countries, which seem to require longer background checks). 

One final point: There have been rumors that the Asylum Division is terminating asylum grants for people from Ethiopia due to improved country conditions. In response to a question on this point, the Asylum Division states–

The Asylum Division initiates termination review when we receive person specific evidence that an individual asylee may be subject to termination of asylum status for any of the applicable grounds under 8 C.F.R. § 208.24. We have not issued any policy memos/directives/other information regarding the termination of asylum status based on the individual no longer having a well-founded fear of persecution due to changed country conditions in the individual’s country of nationality or last habitual residence.

In other words, there is no blanket policy to terminate asylum for Ethiopians. Whether this means that Ethiopian asylees are safe, I am not sure, but at least there is no general policy to terminate asylum in such cases.

So that’s the latest from the Asylum Division. If the recent agreement with Mexico blocks applicants from coming here, we might see resources moving from the border to the backlog, which could cause things to speed up. Only time will tell, and if there is news at the next Quarterly Meeting, I will try to post it here.

Related Post

161 comments

  1. Hi Jason,
    I think I accidentally posted this same question under a different article and couldn’t manage to delete it, sorry about that and please delete it from there if necessary.

    Thank you for what you do.

    Applied for asylum in June 2014
    Attended interview in June 2017
    Got recommended approval pending background check in August 2017

    And nothing since then! My attorney mailed asylum office with inquiry 3 times- no success. I emailed Arlington asylum office and all they said is that the case is pending and that I need to wait. I have zero criminal or other record. What can I do to get the decision? Am I affected by the backlog?

    I was advised to write a letter to local governor and potentially file writ of mandamus. What is your opinion on this?

    Thank you!

    Reply
    • You could try a mandamus – we wrote about that on October 2, 2018. Before that, if you can go to the office in person, you should try that. Make an appointment – a link to Info Pass is at right. Sometimes, going in person might help. I doubt the governor would help. You could try a Congress person, but I think going in person is probably more likely to help, and if that fails, maybe a mandamus. Take care, Jason

      Reply
  2. hi jason,
    even if my husband reports to immigration, how long will the process takes ?
    do they contact me before giving their decisions? or will they try to verify if it is actually me ?
    i am planning to return united states as early as next week, will i face any trouble in port of entry ?

    Reply
    • Sorry, I am not sure what you are referring to. Maybe re-state the question? Thank you, Jason

      Reply
  3. Hi Jason, I have been following your blog. I applied my Asylum in May 2018 while my National Interest Waiver (NIW) I-140 petition that I submitted in April 2018 was pending. My I-140 petition was transferred from the Texas Service Center (TSC) to the Houston Asylum Office (HAO) to be merged under the same A number. We had contacted the Houston Asylum and according to the response, the I-140 will not be adjudicated until the asylum case has been adjudicated. I read somewhere that there is no provision to prevent one from filing different petitions with the USCIS. My employer is going to file a PERM Labor Cert and then I-140 upon approval. What can I do to get my I-140 NIW to be transferred back to the TSC so the petition can be adjudicated because the asylum has been pending and I don’t know when it will be adjudicated.Currently the I-140 is outside of the normal processing time. Thank you.

    Reply
    • I’m from Malaysia btw.

      Reply
      • I love Perhentian Island! Jason

        Reply
        • I love it. I scuba dived there.

          Reply
    • I have not seen that happen, but maybe the first thing to try is to contact the asylum office, tell them about the problem, and see whether they can transfer the file to the appropriate office. You can find their contact info if you follow the link at right called Asylum Office Locator. Take care, Jason

      Reply
      • Hi Jason, thank you for your response. My NIW lawyer had emailed the Houston Asylum Office to inquire when the NIW file will be transferred back to the TSC for processing but the response is that my file is under review. USCIS/asylum does not adjudicate I-140 petitions/applications. That was forwarded to the asylum office to join with the A-file. At such time as the review is completed the petition and A-file will be forwarded to the service center for continued processing of that petition. I need help to get the I-140 NIW petition to be transferred back to the TSC. Otherwise waiting for the I-140 would be as long as waiting for the asylum to be adjudicated. Anyone else had the same experience?

        Reply
        • Ugh – I do not have a great idea if the asylum office is holding the case. Maybe the lawyer can try the AILA liaison? Or the USCIS Ombudsman – a link is at right. Or if nothing works, a mandamus to force USCIS to process the I-140. It is very annoying that USCIS is blocking many people simply by refusing to do their job. Good luck, Jason

          Reply
          • Hi Jason, if you don’t mind to answer the following. I like your suggestions. What do I need to specifically tell my lawyer on using the AILA liaison? How does it help to resolve? I also like the Ombudsman route before the mandamus. Thank you again.

          • If your lawyer is a member of AILA, or maybe some other lawyer’s group, they have a liaison who can communicate with the asylum office. It can be a burdensome process, but when there is a strange issue like this, it can sometimes help. The Ombudsman is less likely to help, but you never know, and it is free (except for the lawyer’s fees). Take care, Jason

    • hi jason,
      can u please tell me the process of abandoning Green card?
      i am out of United States since last week and my spouse in USA is threatening me of abandoning both of our green card and return back to our native country. Can my spouse really do that as my spouse has all my info but i have my green card with me right now? can he apply for abandoning my green card while i am away?
      i really do not want to abandon my green card. So, what should i do now? Should i return USA as soon as possible or is there anything my spouse can do without my will? i am really worried
      waiting for your response.
      thanks

      Reply
      • I do not know what your spouse could do – maybe if you got the GC through him, he could claim that you received it based on fraud, but otherwise, I do not see what he can do. You have the card, and so you can board a plane to return. Normally, a person only loses the GC if they commit a crime or stay outside the US for too long (under 6 months is safe, but over 6 months out carries some risk, and the longer you remain outside the US without returning, the greater the risk). Take care, Jason

        Reply
        • hi jason
          my spouse threatening me that he will tell the immigration that he received his green card by fraud so that i could lose my card as-well. is it really possible if my husband found fraud, i will lose my card as-well?
          if not what is the maximum he can do with my green card while i am out of united states?
          thanks

          Reply
          • It may be possible, but you would still be entitled to due process (meaning, an interview or hearing with a judge). I suppose he could report the fraud, which could affect you upon re-entry – you might be referred to a court. Maybe you want to talk to a lawyer about this now, to go over specifics and try to protect yourself. Take care, Jason

Write a comment