The Immigration Judge (IJ) Dashboard is a CGRS tool for our technical assistance (TA) users that aggregates reports from IJ decisions in asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT) claims collected through our outcomes tracking program.
CGRS has been collecting case outcome information since 1999. We have amassed a database of over 15,000 case outcomes, which contain nuanced information on the individual applicant, specific information on legal theory presented, and other information.
The IJ Dashboard contains outcomes information collected by CGRS, including from our TA users on their asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT, including:
- Applicant demographics: country of origin, age, and gender.
- Case information: basis of the claim, such as gang violence, LGBTQ identity, or political activism.
- Legal theory: specific information on the protected grounds advanced and how the adjudicator ruled on each one.
- Denial rationale: in cases where any type of relief was denied, what the rationale was -- e.g., lack of nexus to a protected ground, particular social group cognizability, credibility, etc.
- IJ background information: including their home immigration court, other immigration courts where they have decided cases, year of appointment, and who appointed them.
The CGRS team is working to add the following information to the dashboard in the coming months:
- Specific types of relief: granular information on whether the IJ granted or denied asylum, withholding, or CAT.
- Bars: in applicable cases, which bars were considered -- e.g., one year filing deadline, particularly serious crime, etc.
- Detention and representation status: whether applicants were detained and/or represented.
- And much more!
The information in the IJ Dashboard comes from outcomes that legal advocates have shared with CGRS in cases where they have accessed TA. Over the last 25 years, we have collected thousands of immigration judge decisions, which make up the data shared in the IJ Dashboard.
Essentially, the dashboard is a container for outcomes reported to us: in order to increase the usability of the tool and coverage, please report outcomes and encourage your colleagues to do the same!
For more information on how outcomes data is collected and deployed in the IJ Dashboard, refer to our Data Methodology page.
Other similar data projects, such as TRAC, Immigration Commons, and Asylum Navigator contain IJ grant and denial information and are populated by large sets of publicly available data made available in the EOIR FOIA Library.
The IJ Dashboard is designed to complement these tools: it exclusively displays outcome information collected by CGRS from our own cases and those of other legal advocates. The pool of available outcomes may be smaller, but the information is more nuanced: the data goes beyond grants and denials and reflects forms of relief pursued, protected grounds considered, denial rationale, and more, depending on the depth of information the advocate shared with CGRS.
Information contained in the IJ Dashboard is not predictive: it is not indicative or representative of nationwide adjudication trends and should not be used to forecast asylum case outcomes.
CGRS recommends that advocates use TRAC, Asylum Navigator, Immigration Commons, and other similar tools in conjunction with the IJ Dashboard to have as robust a picture as possible.
Creating and sustaining the IJ Dashboard would not be possible without the collaboration of thousands of legal advocates throughout the country who have shared outcomes information with CGRS. To report an outcome to CGRS, please visit this page. We greatly appreciate your contributions!
Absolutely not. CGRS never shares personally identifiable information (PII) from TA cases. We request that attorneys not provide us with any PII when filling out a case intake (e.g., A-numbers, full names, etc.). Additionally, only other legal advocates working on an individual case at the Immigration Court level which has been registered with CGRS can access the IJ Dashboard: we do not allow the general public access.
We receive new outcomes every day and update the IJ Dashboard on a weekly basis.
For security purposes, outcomes are not immediately available on the IJ Dashboard. CGRS staff review all reported outcomes to ensure that no confidential information is contained in any field. Once that review has been completed, the outcome is added to the IJ Dashboard.
The IJ Dashboard synthesizes information collected through out outcomes program. Detailed information on how data is collected and deployed can be found on the Data Collection Methodology page.
The IJ Dashboard is available on our site at any time for advocates who have registered an Immigration Court case with CGRS's TA program. To access, log in to your CGRS account and either submit a new case intake or find an existing case on your My Cases page. Click on Immigration Judge Dashboard on any eligible case for access.
You can only access the IJ Dashboard for IJs for which you have registered a case with CGRS. If your case is transferred to another IJ, you can edit your case to change the IJ by going to the case record and clicking Edit. Once you have saved your changes, you will be able to access the IJ Dashboard for the new IJ. You will no longer have access to the IJ Dashboard for the initial IJ unless you have a different case registered with CGRS before that IJ.
For internal tracking and reporting purposes, CGRS requires every case number (the five-digit number generated upon submitting a case intake form) to correspond to an actual individual client and contain accurate information about their case. Therefore, if you are interested in accessing a dashboard for an IJ for whom you do not have a case before, please contact us at CGRS-TA@uclawsf.edu so we can assist you. Please do not provide inaccurate information.
For more information, review our TA program policies.
Currently, users can filter the outcomes information by either country of origin or date of decision. Add or remove filters at any time from the filter bar at the top of the page.
However, we encourage users to limit the number of filters you apply: some IJs have only a few outcomes, and filtering may exclude helpful information. Additionally, legal theory may be helpful across countries -- e.g., an IJ may have determined that "Guatemalan women" is a cognizable particular social group (PSG), but filtering by other countries would exclude this information and preclude you from learning that the IJ has recognized PSGs defined by gender and nationality.
Although CGRS has outcomes from over 800 different IJs in our database, there are some gaps in our coverage as our information is user-generated. The IJ Dashboard serves as a container for outcomes reported by advocates; please help us improve its usefulness by reporting outcomes and encouraging others to do so!
As the IJ Dashboard is based on user-generated data, it relies on other TA users to report their outcomes. The IJ Dashboard is a container for outcomes reported by fellow advocates: to help us improve it, please report case outcomes.
Currently, users are only granted access to dashboards for IJs for which they have registered an actual fear-of-return case with CGRS. If you need information about another IJ, please email CGRS-TA@uclawsf.edu and we will do our best to assist you.
The Basis of Claim information is sourced from the case intake submitted to access CGRS's TA services. As the legal theory may have evolved by the time the outcome was rendered, the Protected Grounds section reflects the actual protected grounds considered by the IJ.
Basis of Claim information is included to indicate broadly - not specifically - what types of cases a particular IJ has adjudicated. For specific information on which protected grounds were proposed and how they were decided, refer to the Protected Grounds section.
No, this information should not be considered predictive. The IJ Dashboard is intended to provide site users with a birds-eye view of the outcomes CGRS has on file regarding that IJ, but for confidentiality reasons, does not share specific, case-level information. Many factors impact whether an IJ accepts a certain formulation, such as their level of experience, political context at the time of the decision, specific facts of the case, and DHS stipulations.
Therefore, protected ground articulations that were accepted by an IJ in a past outcome should not be interpreted to guarantee success in future outcomes. We share this information to give advocates an idea of the universe of formulations that have been advanced before this IJ.
We strongly recommend that advocates interpret this information in conjunction with the specific guidance provided in other CGRS resources available in the TA Library, such as: Overview to Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and Convention Against Torture Protection, Including Bars to Relief Section II.B: Protected Grounds, Understanding the Circularity Principle for Particular Social Group Claims, or other topic-specific CGRS practice advisories, e.g., fear-of-gang claims, children's cases, domestic violence claims, etc.
No, this information should not be considered predictive. The IJ Dashboard is intended to provide site users with a bird's-eye view of the outcomes CGRS has collected regarding that IJ. Many factors impact how an IJ treats a certain formulation, such as their level of experience, political context at the time of the decision, specific facts of the case, case law, and DHS stipulations.
Therefore, protected ground articulations that were not accepted by an IJ in a past outcome should not be interpreted to pretermit success in future outcomes. We share this information to give advocates an idea of the universe of formulations that have been advanced before a particular IJ.
We strongly recommend that advocates interpret this information in conjunction with the specific guidance provided in other CGRS resources available in the TA Library, such as: Overview to Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and Convention Against Torture Protection, Including Bars to Relief Section II.B: Protected Grounds, Understanding the Circularity Principle for Particular Social Group Claims, or other topic-specific CGRS practice advisories, e.g., fear-of-gang claims, children's cases, domestic violence claims, etc.