Judge Samuel M. Factor FY 2017 - 2022, New York Immigration Court (2024)

Published Oct 26, 2022

Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed Samuel M. Factor to begin hearing cases in October2018. Judge Factor earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1995 and a Bachelor of Science in 2002, bothfrom the City University of New York, College of Staten Island, and a Juris Doctor in 1998 fromthe Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. From 2010 to 2018, he was an administrative lawjudge with the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, State of New York, in Brooklyn.From 2007 to 2010, he was an agency attorney with the Department of Homeless Services, Cityof New York. Judge Factor is a member of the New York State Bar and District of ColumbiaBar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Factor were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2017 through 2022. During this period, court records show that Judge Factor decided 695 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 414, granted 6 other types of relief, and denied relief to 275. Converted to percentage terms, Factor denied 39.6 percent and granted 60.5 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Factor's denial rate each fiscal year over this recent period. (Rates for years with less than 25 decisions are not shown.)

Figure 1: Percent of Asylum Matters Denied

Nationwide Comparisons

Compared to Judge Factor's denial rate of 39.6 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 63.8 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the New York Immigration Court where Judge Factor decided these cases denied asylum 34 percent of the time. See Figure2.

Judge Factor'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.

Figure 2: Comparing Denial Rates (percents)

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 (83%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Factor, 1.6% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure3. For the nation as a whole, about 16.7% of asylum seekers are not represented.

Figure 3: Asylum Seeker Had Representation

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 Factor came from China. Individuals from this country made up 36.8% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Factor were: India (10.4%), Bangladesh (6.6%), El Salvador (6.3%), Ecuador (4.7%). See Figure4.

In the nation as a whole during this same period, major nationalities of asylum seekers, in descending order of frequency, were El Salvador (18.2%), Guatemala (16.0%), Honduras (14.6%), Mexico (10.5%), China (7.5%), India (4.5%), Cuba (2.5%), Venezuela (2.1%), Ecuador (2.1%), Nicaragua (1.9%), Haiti (1.7%), Cameroon (1.5%), Nepal (1.2%).

Figure 4: Asylum Decisions by Nationality