There is a serious shortage of immigration attorneys. The dearth of lawyers makes it more difficult for non-citizens to obtain legal help. It also makes the immigration system less efficient.
A recent report from TRAC Immigration shows that representation rates in Immigration Court have fallen significantly in recent years. In 2019, 65% of non-citizens in court had a lawyer. In 2023, only 30% were represented by counsel.
What’s the reason for this shortfall? How is it affecting immigrants, lawyers, and “the system,” and what can be done to raise representation rates?
The main problem is not that there are fewer immigration attorneys than in 2019. Rather, as the number of litigants in Immigration Court has skyrocketed, there are not enough existing and new lawyers to take their cases. According to TRAC–
Simple math exposes the challenge of finding representation. The Court backlog has increased more than three-fold since September 2019. This also means that three times as many immigrants need attorneys.
So one reason for the immigration lawyer shortfall is increased demand that is largely unmet. Another problem is that the system itself is a disaster–both in Immigration Court and the Asylum Office. Setting aside the severe damage this does to migrants, the asylum system inflicts significant harm on attorneys. Reports indicate that immigration lawyers are facing a “longstanding mental health crisis,” and this certainly aligns with what I hear from my colleagues (and what I say to them). Given the difficult work environment, it’s not surprising that more new lawyers are not entering the field, and that some old timers are leaving.
The lawyer shortfall has real-world consequences for non-citizens and for the system itself. For people in court, representation by an attorney makes a difference. TRAC reports that in–
FY 2016 immigration judges denied… unrepresented asylum seekers’ claims 90 percent of the time. In contrast, if represented, the odds of denial… was 48 percent. Or stated another way, more than five out of every ten represented asylum seekers were successful as compared with only one out of every ten who were unrepresented.
When asylum seekers in Immigration Court do not have a lawyer, they are more likely to lose. I have not seen data on representation at the Asylum Office, and while I expect the disparity between represented and unrepresented applicants is less dramatic, having a lawyer there would certainly improve an applicant’s odds of success.
Lawyers also benefit the system. When a person in court is unrepresented, the judge usually gives her more time to find a lawyer. This delays the case, often by many months. Also, lawyers know how to organize and present an applicant’s claim, which allows the case to proceed more efficiently. The same is true at the Asylum Office, where the lawyer can present the application and evidence in an organized fashion, which makes the officer’s job easier.
If attorneys benefit asylum seekers and the system, what can the government do to increase representation?
The most obvious answer is that the government could provide attorneys to people who cannot afford them, either directly or by funding non-profit organizations. The immigration bill that recently failed contained a provision to provide lawyers for minors and people who were deemed incapable of representing themselves. Had it become law, this would have been a good start.
The government could also do more to increase the number of accredited representatives. These are non-lawyers who work for non-profits and who are permitted to represent immigrants in court. If this program could be expanded to private law firms, the pool of potential accredited representatives would expand dramatically.
Also, much more could be done to encourage private attorneys to enter and remain in the field.
In Immigration Court, schedules should be more regular, cases should not be randomly advanced or canceled, judges should respect attorney’s requests for additional time to prepare or if they have a scheduling conflict, Master Calendar Hearings should always have a Webex (internet-based) option, and communicating with courts should be easier. We also need more DHS attorneys (prosecutors) who should make an effort to resolve cases well before the trial, so attorneys do not have to spend time preparing cases that will ultimately be dismissed.
At the Asylum Office, interviews should not be scheduled without sufficient notice, we should return to “first-in, first-out” (FIFO) scheduling, the Asylum Office Scheduling Bulletin should be re-instituted, so we have an idea about when long-delayed applicants will receive their interviews, and there should be more transparency about when to expect decisions.
Of course, private attorneys need to be paid. For that to happen, our clients often need time. When cases move very quickly, attorneys have to charge more money up front. As a result, some asylum seekers won’t be able to afford the fee. If court schedules allowed for a reasonable and predictable time frame, and if the Asylum Office returned to FIFO, or at least gave sufficient notice before the interview, attorneys could offer a more reasonable payment schedule, which would make it easier for asylum seekers to afford counsel.
In short, if the government made case schedules more predictable and more manageable, the practice environment for lawyers would improve, and the field would become more attractive to newcomers. Unfortunately, for the last many years, and through various Administrations, the government has demonstrated that it could care less about asylum applicants, let alone their attorneys, and so I doubt we will see improvements any time soon. That’s too bad, because without enough attorneys to represent them, many asylum applicants will be denied the protection they deserve, and our nation’s commitment to human rights will remain unfulfilled.
Hi Jason, I have a question i read in your previous comments but not sure if something was changed science 2022 . Do we need to renew A05 work authorization if we didn’t received Green Card yet and is about to expire or is not necessary . Thank You!
You do not need a work permit to work legally if you have asylum (see https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-resources/handbook-for-employers-m-274/70-evidence-of-employment-authorization-for-certain-categories/73-refugees-and-asylees). However, it does make life easier if you have it. So basically, it is up to you. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I am interested to know if you can be denied asylum based on the ground that you are married to two people at one time.
I am asking this for a friend whose first wife had developed cancer and asked him to marry to another woman so that her kids are well-taken care of after she dies. He did it. It was not in the United States but country X where it is allowed as per law to have two spouses at one time.
Any thoughts?
Thank you!
I do not think this is a basis to deny asylum, and in fact, I have won asylum for at least one client who had two wives. However, I do think it is a basis to deny the Green Card, and so the person will have to resolve the situation by that time (either if the first wife dies or they get a legal divorce), and he may also have to explain the situation. It may be best for the sake of the family if he gets a legal divorce as soon as possible, so this will maybe be less of an issue in the future. For what its worth, my client divorced his first wife and has received his Green Card. Take care, Jason
Myself Faiz Ali. Im asylum seeker. I filed asylum with uscis in LA asylum office. I lived in los angeles. It has been over a year last year jan. I have a work permit.i moved to indiana now. First how to update my asylum office. I know it will be chicago office now. Will changing asylum office result in faster scheduling of interview of asylum . And are they also making new immigration court in Indiana in case i get referred to immigration court ever.
You should file form AR-11, available at http://www.uscis.gov to update your address. You can also email the LA office directly – you can find their email if you follow the link under Resources called Asylum Office Locator. Normally, the AR-11 itself should be enough, but if you do not have a lawyer (who will receive a copy of any letters sent to you), you can email them as well. Moving will probably not have any effect on when you will get the interview, or at least no effect that is predictable. If you wanted to try to expedite, I wrote about that on March 23, 2022. In terms of the court, I think they will have a court in Indiana, but I am not sure. Take care, Jason
I am reviewing the ALJs in BIA… It seems most of them are appointed by Bill Barr……that’s a bad news for asylum seekers…right ? Because it will make it harder to win at the BIA level…has it been the experience for your clients ?
The BIA is a mixed bag, but some are very restrictive. Why the Biden Administration has not re-assigned such members, I do not know, but I think leadership is not eager to make it any easier to obtain asylum or other relief. Take care, Jason
Jason, thank you for your response. The BIA is a very important admin. body. In most instances, the BIA is the final arbiter for immigration cases, since it’s the highest body for interpreting and applying immigration laws. And the Chevron Deference doctrine does not help, either. The BIA does not only take asylum cases- they review most immigration cases, which is a big deal, in my book. I agree that the current administration has no interest in this. It’s all lip service
Hi Jason,
My asylum interview has been pending for 10 years with the Miami office and recently I filed an expedite request, which was denied. Instead, they informed me that I was put on a short-notice list, but if I am not willing to waive the 21-day notice requirement, they can put me back in the regular queue. My problem is that the prolonged wait with no end in sight already took a significant toll on my mental health – I have anxiety, depression, trouble sleeping and nightmares. And being in the shortlist (probably for months), knowing that I might get called for an interview tomorrow. would only add to my stress. My question is, if I refuse to waive the 21-day notice requirement, will this hurt my chances for a successful mandamus claim?
I am sorry to hear what you have been through. Maybe try to expedite and then file a mandamus claim.
But I do have one lingering worries tho … That is … If you file a mandamus lawsuit, that might piss off some USCIS officers…and they might retaliate you for being entitled…I think there are case laws saying even if a person is statutorily eligible for asylum, the govt is not required to grant asylum…it’s after all a discretionary benefit…
There are many people in the world that needs protection and are suffering…you are already lucky enough to be in the US soil…I am worried that if , under this relatively nice condition, you still ask for more, it will give the impression that you are a very greedy and insatiable person that might make uscis officers have negative discretion about you…
Do I have a point ?
And this is where most of you get it all wrong: That the government will retaliate for filing a mandamus lawsuit. Really? Your reasoning and downplaying what Mike has posted is what’s ailing our asylum community. You do not know what he is going through and to tell him that he is lucky to be here is wrong.
@Mike, ignore this person, and if you can, go ahead and file a mandamus lawsuit. You will be safe and i am sure they will schedule your interview. Good luck brother
I mean…if @mike is here, in the us soil, even as a pending asylum seeker. S/he will be in a better economic condition and other conditions in general compared to like 80% of the world, at least I think. I think @mike would rather be in here as an asylum seeker in the us soil rather than in countries like russia, north korea…ukraine, and gaza, palestine and israel…and even asylum seekers stuck in the southwest border, waiting for credible fear interview…like be a bit grateful…seriously…people in those countries would dream to be in @mike’s position.
Thank you! Yep, I definitely ignore advice of armchair experts. I hope Jason will reply.
I think it is completely unreasonable and ridiculous to wait 10 years or more for an interview, and I think the asylum officers know that as well. I do not think filing a mandamus will have a negative effect on the case. We have done a number of cases where the person filed a mandamus and as far as I can tell, no one’s case has been negatively affected. Take care, Jason
I agree it’s absolutely unreasonable…
But, it’s also unreasonable for people to endure harm, persecution, violence and dictatorship or war, like many in the world are experiencing.
So in relative terms…@mike’s condition is less unreasonable than like 80% people in the world ?
I am not bothered by the fact that @mike is crying for help, you have every right. But why it seems, @mike is in a relatively nice condition and we have the resource to help him, but shouldn’t the limited resources be reserved for the most harmed first, for equity and equality reason ? Like women fleeing domestic violence in the border, lgbtqs suffer in russia and gaza…they are obviously in more urgent condition than a pending asylum seeker who is already in the U.S. and has work authorization ? right ? Can’t @mike just wait for a little while ? after those women and lgbtqs get to safety and then we can address your problem, is that an acceptable deal ?
I just don’t like to see that people who are better off are favored in our immigration system, in terms of having their cases handled first and have better access to legal resources.
MANDAMUS CLAIM, so you agree your point is fallacy after fallacy and balderdash, correct?!
balderdash…
I mean…unreasonableness is a spectrum…it’s not a binary choice(reasonable or unreasonable)…@mike’s position is less unreasonable than the other groups I mentioned…that’s whay i mean
Typically, they will not fight the mandamus cases and once you file, they will reach a settlement and agree to interview you, and so in that scenario, I do not see how the refusing the (unreasonable) short notice offer will affect the mandamus. If they decide to fight the mandamus, maybe your refusal could be used against you. I would talk to a lawyer who does mandamus cases in Miami to see what the lawyer thinks. Take care, Jason
Jason, good evening!
Where can I find more info on speeding my asylum case with assistance of my senator? Does it yield any results at all? Thank you.
There is a link under Resources called Senate that can help you find contact info for your Senator. I did a post with such ideas on expediting on March 23, 2022. Contacting the Senator and making other efforts is worth a try, but if it does not work, you can try a mandamus lawsuit, and that likely will work. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
Thank you again for all do for our asylum community, God bless you!
I have question about my case, I was actually in court for individual hearing but my case was dimed to have material support to the third tier terorist group by DHS! The judge says that he finds the case credible! Is the there a way to apply for exemption? Thank you
Hello Jason,
Thank you again for all do for our asylum community, God bless you!
I have question about my case, I was actually in court for individual hearing but my case was dimed to have material support to the third tier terorist group by DHS! The judge says that he finds the case credible! Is the there a way to apply for exemption? Thank you
I did a post on June 24, 2016 and maybe that would give you an idea, but you will need to find a lawyer to help, as this can be complicated and take a long time. I have not done this for someone and so I do not know a lot about it, but I think you ultimately have to apply to DHS for an exemption, and whether they will agree (or even respond), I do not know. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I follow your forum since 2017 and my wife and I submitted two separate applications for asylum I-589. My wife had her first interview two years ago and the officer didn’t question me, only interviewed my wife and now my case is scheduled for an interview. Do you think it will be the same officer?
Regards
I highly doubt it will be the same officer. If your wife is a dependent on your case, she should attend. If not, maybe she wants to go anyway and ask whether they can add her as a dependent that day. She can also try asking about her own cases, though I doubt they will have any information about that. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
Thank you again for all do for our asylum community, God bless you!
I have question about my case, I was actually in court for individual hearing but my case was dimed to have material support to the third tier terorist group by DHS! The judge says that he finds the case credible! Is the there a way to apply for exemption? Thank you
Thanks Jason!
Hi Jason ,I had a second asylum interview I found out that the first officer documented the wrong info ,I told the 2nd officer about it she just documented what I said .is this will effect the decision of the case ?
They will have to evaluate your testimony. If they think there is an inconsistency that is your fault and that you failed to explain, it could affect credibility (whether they believe you or not). However, if you explained the issue, they will hopefully find you credible. You might want to file a Freedom of Information Act request to see if you can get both officers’ notes – there is a link under Resources called FOIA USCIS that might help. Take care, Jason