The latest data from our nation’s Immigration Courts reveals that judges are deciding more asylum cases than ever–and that denial rates are increasing.
The most recent numbers are from March 2025, and show that Immigration Judges adjudicated 10,933 asylum applications, which is the most cases ever decided in a single month. Of those, 76% were denied–another record.
Here, we’ll examine the data and see if we can learn more about what’s going on.
Before we get to that, a word of warning. We need to be cautious about interpreting this new information. The raw numbers don’t necessarily tell the full story, and so what any of this means for an individual case before an individual Immigration Judge (IJ) is not so clear. That said, the general pattern over the last several months shows a clear trend towards more decisions and more denials.
In terms of the volume of decisions, IJs have been deciding more and more cases since the end of the pandemic. From late 2022 until the end of 2024, Immigration Courts were ruling on roughly 6,000 cases per month. The numbers began to spike in January (Mr. Trump took office on January 20) when courts adjudicated 8,050 cases, and increased through February (9,829 cases) to March, when IJs decided a record-breaking 10,933 cases.
With regard to asylum denial rates in court, the current upward trend began well before President Trump took office. In August 2023, IJs denied 45% of asylum case. After that, the number of denials began to climb rapidly and steadily. One year later, in August 2024, IJs were denying 60% of asylum cases, and during the last full month of President Biden’s term, December 2024, judges denied 64% of cases. The first few months of Mr. Trump’s presidency have seen a continuation and perhaps an acceleration of this trend. In February 2025, IJs denied 74% of asylum cases and in March, they denied 76% of cases.
Looking at these trends, the bigger mystery for me is why so many more cases are being decided in Immigration Court. The number of IJs has not increased since January. On the contrary, a dozen or more judges have been terminated since Mr. Trump took office, and so more judges is not the explanation for more decisions. One prominent commentator, Austin Kocher, states that the Trump Administration “appears to be fast-tracking asylum decisions with the clear goal of clearing the docket by simply denying as many people as possible, as quickly as possible.” Maybe. But I don’t know how the IJs have the time to adjudicate more cases.
While courts decided a record number of cases in March, unless there are much more radical changes, the backlog is not going away any time soon. There are currently more than 2 million immigrants awaiting asylum hearings (and more than 3.6 million cases of all types in Immigration Court). Even if judges could sustain the completion rate from March, it would take more than 15 years to get through all the pending asylum applications, assuming no new cases enter the system.
The more important question for asylum seekers–and perhaps the easier question to answer–is why the percentage of denials has been increasing. I can think of a few reasons.
First, DHS (the prosecutor in Immigration Court) has been more aggressively resisting asylum approvals. In one of my recent cases, for example, the DHS attorney explicitly told me that she could not agree to a grant of asylum, even though she would have agreed during the prior Administration. Thankfully, the IJ approved the case and DHS did not appeal, but in general, when DHS more strongly opposes relief, IJs are more likely to deny.
A second issue is the CBP-One app (a/k/a the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways rule). Starting on May 11, 2023, asylum seekers who entered at the U.S.-Mexico border and who did not make an appointment using the CBP-One app are barred from asylum. Though there are some narrow exceptions, many migrants are being denied asylum because they failed to use the app, and I expect this contributes to the higher denial rate in court.
Another, less pleasant, possibility is that IJs are adjusting their decision-making to please the new boss. To some extent, it is reasonable for judges to follow the lead of the Administration in office, as long as they continue to follow the law. But here, where the Trump Administration has been so aggressive on so many fronts, it seems to me that IJs have a particular responsibility to ensure that asylum seekers receive a fair hearing. Whether judges’ desire to please the current Administration (and protect their jobs) is contributing to the higher denial rates, we really do not know, but I worry that the Administration’s well-publicized efforts to fire people perceived as disloyal may push some IJs to deny more cases. The IJs that I know personally are people of great integrity, and I think they are not particularly susceptible to such intimidation, but when your job and livelihood are on the line, it does create perverse incentives.
Finally, although it would not be reflected in the March data, a recent policy decision (from April 2025) allows IJs to dismiss legally insufficient cases without a hearing, and we can expect this policy to lead to more and faster decisions, and more denials.
While denial rates continues to climb, it is still possible to put together a successful application and it is important not to give up. Gather your evidence, prepare your affidavit, and do your best to present the strongest case possible. In that way, even in these difficult times, it is still possible to win asylum.
Hello Jason,
I have a question regarding N400 (asylum based)application part 9 question 15b. Do we need to mention detentions in the home country (which are the base of the asylum case) the question does not specify.
Thanks for all you do.
If you listed political arrests or detentions in your asylum case and green card application (form I-485), you should also list them in your N-400. Whether the question should be answered “yes” or “no” depends on whether you think you were subject to an arrest, but either way, you can include an explanation on the supplement page that the arrest was not a lawful arrest, or that it was political, and that you mentioned it in your asylum application. The key is that all the forms are consistent, and if there are inconsistencies (you forgot to mention the detention on form I-485, for example), you should provide an explanation. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I want to order EOIR transcripts from my hearing. How can i do this in NYC Federal plaza? No one answers phone, how does it work?
If the case is at the Board of Immigration Appeals, they will create a transcript and send it to you, but if the case is at the Immigration Court, I think they do not prepare a transcript. You should be able to go to the court and listen to the recording of the hearing. You may have to go in person to make that request, as I do not know how to do that beforehand, aside from calling. Take care, Jason
How to add asylum case to online account. I applied paper based asylum back in jan 2023 by mail . I have work permit and receipt of asylum . When i try to add asylum case to my online account i cant .but i was able to add work permit applications when work permits were pending. paper filed i-589 cant be added. Also i didnt write my online account number on my i-589 so maybe thats why i cant add it. In ead application they gave me a code which i used to add case to online account.
Secondly in Arlington asylum office will i get interview soon or 2023 applicants are not getting interviews.
Thirdly republicans passed a bill which makes work permits for asylum 6 months will uscis take our 5 year work permit and give us 6 months work permits .
1 – As far as I know, it is not possible to add a paper-filed I-589 to the online account. Maybe that will change, but at this time, I think you cannot do it. 2 – Arlington is currently interviewing newest cases, so mostly 2025 and maybe some 2024, and oldest cases, which are mostly 2015, 2016, and maybe 2017. I do not know when they will get to 2023, but much of this seems pretty random, and so it is a good idea to get your case ready and have all your evidence, so you can submit it when they schedule your interview – they do not give much advance notice about the interviews, and so if you do not have your evidence and you wait to get your interview notice, you may not have enough time to gather and submit everything. Take care, Jason
Thank you Jason for your help!
I have a quick question, what happens if your asylum case is denied at the uscis interview? Will i be deported immediately at the interview to a third country? My home country passport was expired in 2018 and i never bothered renewing it. I applied for asylum in 2017 while i was in F1 visa and eventually got work permit though pending asylum application. Currently i do not have any visa status except pending asylum. I never over stayed because i applied for asylum while on F1 student status.
Your response will be much appreciated 🙏🏽
In this situation, if you are denied at the asylum office, your case will be referred to Immigration Court where you can present the case again to a judge. The judge will either grant asylum (or some other relief) or order you deported. That order can be appealed. So you have a way to go before you can legally be removed from the U.S. Do note that the asylum offices are interviewing many old cases, and so you should make sure you have all your evidence and are ready to go, just in case you get scheduled soon for an interview. Take care, Jason
Thank you for all you do for people in need.
You are great human being. Proud to share the world with you.
Thank you, Jason
Hi Jason,
I hope you’re doing well. I wanted to follow up on an issue we previously discussed regarding a USCIS error. I had originally applied for asylum, and my case was referred to an immigration judge. Due to COVID delays, I didn’t receive a hearing for a long time. In the meantime, I applied for EB1A. Fortunately, before the EB1A was processed, I received an individual hearing, and the judge approved my asylum case.
A few months later, my EB1A petition was also approved, and I proceeded to apply for adjustment of status based on that EB1A approval. However, USCIS mistakenly attached someone else’s VAWA case to my file. I filed a FOIA request to clarify the matter, contacted USCIS, and also reached out to my congressman. USCIS scheduled an in-person appointment, took new biometrics, and assured me that the VAWA case had been removed from my record.
However, today I received the FOIA documents, and to my surprise, the VAWA case of someone else still appears in my file. I called USCIS again to reconfirm, and I also contacted the attorney representing the individual whose VAWA case was mistakenly linked to mine to inform them of the situation.
I’m reaching out to ask if there’s anything else I should be doing at this point to ensure this issue is fully resolved and doesn’t affect my adjustment of status process. Your guidance would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
I am not sure there is much more to do. There used to be an Ombudsman’s office at USCIS and that would have been a good place to go to for help, but the current Administration eliminated the office. It sounds like you have a record of your efforts to correct the problem, and that should be helpful if USCIS ever questions this or it causes you any difficulty. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
Are these numbers for the cases referred from asylum office or for defensive?
As I understand, they are all asylum cases in court, however they got to court. Take care, Jason